Re: Long-lived transactions

Greg Hudson wrote:

>The downside of long-lived transactions is that they feel a lot like
>branches, and having two ways of doing the same thing is poor. (We
>would start to get calls to be able to stick working directories to
>named transactions, to be able to merge into a transaction, stuff like
>that.) But it would mean being able to manipulate a repository without
>either creating a new revision or being chained to the performance
>characteristics of a working directory.
>
>

But on the other hand, these long-lived transactions you proposed behave
exactly like locks on HEAD should behave! With locks, your example:

> repos=http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn
> cl=$repos/trunk/clients
> svn mktrans $repos reorg
> svn mv -t reorg $cl/cmdline $cl/cmdline.old
> svn mv -t reorg $cl/cmdline.new $cl/cmdline
> svn citrans $repos reorg
>
would become:

  cl=http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/clients
  svn lock $cl -m 'Reorganizing the clients directory'
  svn mv $cl/cmdline $cl/cmdline.old
  svn mv $cl/cmdline.new $cl/cmdline
  svn ci $cl

-- 
Brane Čibej   <brane_at_xbc.nu>   http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org