A fix for the issue treating svn repo as perforce by mistake

Review Request #3525 — Created Nov. 17, 2012 and submitted




This issue occurred when post-review in an svn repo while p4 client is
also installed. Since p4 tool is checked in prio, the svn repo will be
treated in p4 way and an error message will be prompted. It would be
better we consider svn whose metadata is stored locally in prio to p4
whose metadata is stored on server side.

Description From Last Updated

1. change the issue

MU muthukrishnanv
  1. While it no doubt works, it's a bandaid. The core problem needs to somehow be addressed, or it will just happen again down the road. At some point, we'll no longer have a hard-coded list of repository types. They'll be scanned instead, likely alphabetically.
    1. Hi Christian,
      Thanks for your comment!
      IMHO, even if the version-control tools will be scanned alphabetically, this issue won't be fixed because perforce is prior to subversion alphabetically. Actually what I'm trying to suggest is scanning tools in an order that svn whose metadata is stored locally prior to p4 whose metadata is stored on server side. Does it make sense to you?
    2. We should really rely more on the REPOSITORY setting in the .reviewboardrc file, and use whichever SCM type that one is on the server.
    3. I agree. Still, I'm going to go ahead and commit this for now, because p4 really is.. special.. in how it decides a repo is valid. 
  2. rbtools/clients/__init__.py (Diff revision 1)
    1. change the issue
    1. This is a production server. Please use demo.reviewboard.org for your testing.
  1. Ship It!
Review request changed

Status: Closed (submitted)

Change Summary:

Pushed to master (50628e8)