Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Robert Ewald <robert.ewald@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> +sub refname {
>> + my ($refname) = "refs/remotes/$_[0]->{ref_id}" ;
>> +
>> + # It cannot end with a slash /, we'll throw up on this because
>> + # SVN can't have directories with a slash in their name, either:
>> + if ($refname =~ m{/$}) {
>> + die "ref: '$refname' ends with a trailing slash, this is ",
>> + "not permitted by git nor Subversion\n";
>> + }
>> +
>> + # It cannot have ASCII control character space, tilde ~, caret ^,
>> + # colon :, question-mark ?, asterisk *, space, or open bracket [
>> + # anywhere.
>> + #
>> + # Additionally, % must be escaped because it is used for escaping
>> + # and we want our escaped refname to be reversible
>> + $refname =~ s{([ \%~\^:\?\*\[\t])}{uc sprintf('%%%02x',ord($1))}eg;
>
> uc of sprintf()? You meant "%%%02X"?
You are right. Being a total Perl noob I just took Eric's suggestion from an
earlier post without really understanding everything.
> Other than that, looks sane to me. I presume that SVN branches
> whose name would be mangled with this patch would not have been
> successfully imported with older git-svn anyway, so this won't
> introduce any regressions?
Now that you mention it, I am not entirely sure. We introduce the % which is
mangled as well. It wasn't mangled before.
I now could think of a case that someone has a git-svn branch with a % in the
name checked out.
When updates are fetched a new branch head would be created. It wouldn't
destroy anything, but a script might break. On the other hand, the script needs
to be updated anyway. So I am not sure if % should be handled separately.
> Eric?
Yes, Eric, please comment.
--
Robert Ewald
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
