Re: [PATCH] don't append 'opaquelocktoken:' in PUT and MOVE
- From
Tay Ray Chuan <rctay89@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 7, 2009, 17:52 UTC
- Message-ID
- <be6fef0d0902070952l5818e4b7x3048c667661ce31@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.DEB.1.00.0902071801570.10279@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> Umm. This "16" is a little bit too hardcoded for my liking. I mean, it > is not even obvious from _this_ hunk why "16" should be correct.
Any solutions for this? Would a comment like "skip 'opaquelocktoken:' prefix of length 16" be sufficient? Or maybe in the commit message?
I considered a set of strbuf functions, like for the remote object url (get_remote_object_url and append_remote_object_url), but I thought it was a little overkill, since this is one of the only instances that I can think of where including 'opaquelocktoken:' is unwanted.
> Besides, I have to wonder where request->lock->token is set, and if that > would not be the better place to fix the issue?
Are you suggesting perhaps that we revert commit 753bc91? Or perhaps create another way to access lock tokens, say, get_lock_token(int prepend_scheme)?
-- Cheers, Ray Chuan