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

Re: [RFC] let old svn's error properly in some 'svn1.7 checkout && svn1.6 status' scenarios

From: Daniel Shahaf <danielsh_at_elego.de>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 11:40:07 +0200

Julian Foad wrote on Mon, May 16, 2011 at 17:37:28 +0100:
> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 17:34 +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Julian Foad wrote on Mon, May 16, 2011 at 15:49:52 +0100:
> > > Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > > > Daniel Shahaf wrote on Mon, May 16, 2011 at 15:36:25 +0200:
> > > we should update the FAQ answer given there.
> > >
> >
> > How? To mention that 1.7 doesn't autoupgrade and doesn't provide
> > a downgrade script; anything else?
>
> That sounds fine.
>

r1104049.

> > > > > for details.
> > > > > zsh: exit 1 svn st -q
> > > > > %
> > > > > ]]]
> > > > >
> > > > > So, RFC:
> > > > >
> > > > > * wc-ng working copies shall contain an "entries" file (and/or
> > > > > a "format" file) containing the text "11\n", inside all .svn
> > > > > folders they have (if any).
> > >
> > > Should be SVN_WC__VERSION (curently 28), not 11.
> > >
> >
> > >From IRC:
> >
> > 18:20:39 <@julianf> Curious: why on earth would we not want to provide the correct value?
> > 18:21:38 <@Bert> julianf: We would have to maintain it later
> > 18:21:50 <@danielsh> julianf: because we'd have to create/maintain it at the right value,
> > 18:21:52 <@Bert> (not sure if it is a good reason, but it is a reason)
> > 18:21:55 <@danielsh> and what would need it?
> > 18:21:57 <@julianf> OK
> > 18:22:01 <@danielsh> wc1 clients need ">10"
> > 18:22:05 <@danielsh> wc-ng clients use sqlite
> > 18:22:18 <@danielsh> wc-ng-ng clients read "11" as an indication of "this is sqlite backed working copy"
> >
> > Julian/all, I'll assume "11" is okay if I don't hear otherwise.
> >
> > > When I try with just a 'format' file it doesn't work. It has to have
> > > the 'entries' file (as well or instead) to produce the useful
> > > diagnostic.
> > >
> >
> > I don't remember which (or both) of them do old clients look for.
> > Having both of them is safe though.
> >
> > > This only helps when the target of "svn st" is the WC root folder
> > > (except in some cases it works for an immediate child of the root).
> > >
> >
> > True.
> >
> > > Also I would guess there are some other tools (such as Subversion
> > > plug-ins for IDEs) that would give a more helpful diagnostic if they
> > > find a WC version number there. I wonder if such tools would
> > >
> >
> > > 18:13:12 <@julianf> I meant, "wonder if such tools would like to find a 'format' file, so we ought
> > > to provide both 'entries' and 'format'."
> >
> > I see no harm in providing both files. As to old tools that request our
> > format number via the API, we'll have our API's implemented (the
> > internal API's too) by looking in wc.db.
> >
> > > Given all that, and despite only working for the WC root, I think that
> > > is a useful enough result to be worth doing. I can't think of any
> > > practical objection to having these one or two extra files per WC if it
> > > helps smooth the transition for users.
> > >
> >
> > Thanks. Working on a patch...
> >
> > (I'll create a workqueue 'file-install-string' operation for the
> > svn_wc_upgrade() use case, hence the delay)
>
> Sounds good to me.

(still working on it)
Received on 2011-05-17 10:40:51 CEST

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.