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

Re: Linux Kernel Summit

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_collab.net>
Date: 2001-04-03 20:22:20 CEST

What he said, especially the last paragraph:

Jim Blandy <jimb@zwingli.cygnus.com> writes:
> I don't think Subversion should be involved in:
> 1) checking that bits were transmitted across the network without
> corruption, or
> 2) checking that bits were stored on disk without corruption.
> These are problems which users can address (if they like) by using
> RAID, using hard drives with extensive parity checking, using better
> network media, IPsec MAC facilities (which will detect accidental
> corruption just as well as deliberate corruption), etc. Completely
> generic solutions benefit Subversion as much as anything we could
> hard-code into Subversion itself. They're outside of Subversion's
> responsibility.
> Subversion *should* use checksums or error-correcting information
> where we might make mistakes ourselves --- as in the computation and
> application of text deltas. Which is, in fact, where we're using them
> now.
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:27 2006

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