[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: ".svn" directory name no good (in fact, it is worse than I thought)

From: <kvistgaard_at_users.sourceforge.net>
Date: 2003-09-25 16:10:10 CEST

Ronald Cannes wrote:

>> Morten Kvistgaard wrote:
>>
>> 1) Do nothing, it's a VS.NET problem 2) Change a define on win32 from
>> '.svn' to '_svn' (pre-1.0) 3) Make the meta directory name
>> configurable (post-1.0) 4) Separate meta directories from the working
>> copy (post-1.0)
>
>
> It's not only a VS.NET problem, as pointed out before. I think having
> a ".something" name is dangerous on Windows when even two of
> Microsofts own applications (Explorer and VS.NET) doesn't handle them
> properly.

I use windows in my everyday work. Having used numerous tools that use
dot-files for quite some time, I've seen few if any problems worth
mentioning. Sure, Explorer can't create dot-files, but it doesn't have
to for me to use svn (to me thats similar to not being able to create
repositories from Explorer). Do you have any other svn scenarios on
win32 in mind where dot-files don't work or could be considered dangerous?

Anyway what I was trying to say was that, this seems mainly to be a
problem related to ASP.NET development at the moment (there may be other
cases). While I would have absolutely nothing against a solution, I
dislike the idea of just changing the #define from '.svn' to something
else (e.g. '_svn') on win32. That would make it harder someone like me,
who now and then move WC fragments between, e.g. win32, cygwin and linux.

>
>> The one line change for 2) is code-wise very simple, but I think it
>> robs Subversion of one of its attractive features (moving WC
>> fragments), even if its "just" moving WC fragments across platforms.
>
>
> This should not be a problem as long as svn handles both naming
> schemes (though, "_svn" would be default on windows.)

I think that this will essentially be identical to configurable
meta-directory names, which is fine with me. What should be the default
is debatable; I prefer '.svn' eventhough I'm using win32. But for
implementation and testing this has to be more signicant than simply
changing the #define from '.svn' to '_svn' just for win32 (which I don't
like). And that is probably why some of the people, who unlike me, know
something about the svn implementation are reluctant to add configurable
meta-directory names pre-1.0.

>
> Moving an ASP.NET from *NIX to Windows would imply a one-time rename
> from .svn to _svn, but I don't see why you would have a ASP.NET
> working copy on *NIX anyway :-)

If hardpressed I could probably come up with an example of an external
graphics guy working on a wc fragment on his Mac :-) But there are a
number of other examples, not involving ASP.NET.

>
>
>> And the consequences of this change will stick until someone
>> implements 3). I believe good people have convincingly argued the
>> case against 3) before 1.0.
>
>
> Don't see any consequences if both _ and . are supported.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tired of 56k? Get a FREE BT Broadband connection
> http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/btbroadband
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 25 16:37:43 2003

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.