Re: what is svn 2.0? (was: Re: Another working copy library)

On 2/1/07, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net> wrote:

> Sorry, it's clear that I miscommunicated. I wasn't advocating that 2.0 is
> *merely* code cleanup -- but that 2.0 gives us to the freedom to break
> certain compatibility rules (fs schema, public API, but client-server compat
> only if we have to) if we feel that doing so is justified by some
> user-perceived gain of functionality or performance.

Functionality? Definitely. Performance? I don't think any users
will go through nasty upgrade and incompatibility pains just for
better performance. (Well, not many.)

>
> One (possibly bad) example: atomic renames. [...]

True renames is a really important feature, one which I think users
would be willing to upgrade for.

>
> Don't be so short-sighted. The story might very well be, "Subversion 2.0:
> same as svn 1.7, but cleaner on the inside, faster all 'round, built to
> compatibly support a whole set of upcoming new features, ..."

Sure, that's a reasonable scenario. Just don't expect anyone to
actually bother upgrading till 2.1, when the new features start to
appear. :-)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Feb 1 19:33:23 2007