On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 10:52:40AM -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> Here's a silly question: can't our 'modules' feature solve your
> problem for the time being?
>
> Lay out your repository like this:
>
> /a
> /b
> /c
> /project/
> /modules/
> /fullmodule
> /partialmodule
>
> fullmodule and partialmodule can simply be copies of 'project'. Now
> set the 'svn:externals' property on the two module directories. The
> partialmodule automatically adds a and b subdirs, and the fullmodule
> adds all three subdirs.
>
> Wouldn't that work?
I would consider this a workaround. But at least for the remote
future it would in my opinion be much cleaner to be able to do
decisions that are related to the client side easily with the client
and not with an ugly workaround in the repository.
Assume you have a rather huge project where developers only want to
checkout the stuff they work on regularly. This is not unrealistic,
if you had 800MB sources. Then you don't want to make modules for the
power set of all subprojects.
In my opinion, this is not an urgent issue, but finally I think this
is a need. One reason, companies don't use cvs is (among other
reasons) that it does not scale with such huge source bases and 600
full time developers. I don't have experience, how subversion scales,
but in my opinion, they would not even consider using it, if you
didn't even try to support such use cases with simple stuff you can
do.
For the moment, I am just hand editing the .svn/entries file to do
that. When I find the time, I will implement this myself and send you
the results, if you agreed with me that this is a nice feature that
you will not veto against.
Robert
BTW: These numbers are not somewhat fantastic, but realistic numbers
from a project I was involved to.
--
Robert Schiele Tel.: +49-621-181-2517
Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:rschiele@uni-mannheim.de
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Mon Sep 23 18:21:06 2002