A picture really is worth a thousand words...
I've been lurking on the subversion development list for a couple of
months, now. I just checked out the new status document (Thanks, Ben!)
and noticed the diagram taken from the design document. I've probably
seen it before, but a lot more things make since now than did two months
I see two lines from "Repository Access Method" to "Subversion
Filesystem," one of which goes through "Local Repository Access."
I realize local repository access has been discussed a little bit in
recent messages, but I was under the impression that the item "It is
natively client-server, hence much more maintainable than CVS. (In CVS,
the client-server protocol was added as an afterthought. This means that
most new features have to be implemented twice, or at least more than
once: code for the local case, and code for the client-server case.)"
in the design document implied that there would be no local access to
the repository -- everything would be funnelled through the network
layer. I assumed that someone wanting access to a local repository
would simply point their CVSROOT/SVNROOT at the machine they were
I realize local repository access has been relegated to a lower
priority, but I wonder why even create it at all. It seems to me that
it makes two access paths to the repository resulting in more work and
more possibility of corrupted data.
J. David Blackstone
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:23 2006