David Summers wrote on Wed, 1 Jan 2003 01:58:07 -0600
>On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Bob Gustafson wrote:
>
>> If the fields were labeled (xml tagged) within the repository, then old
>> fields still could exist (but be ignored by current processes) in newer
>> repositories. The current data structures may change, but no data would
>> drop on the floor. To access old data however, would require some special
>> purpose parse code, or perhaps as an alternative to writing code, the
>> dump/restore processes could be done in reverse on those repositories.
>
>Well, last weekend I got a preliminary "svnadmin --xml dump" both as C
>code changes to svnadmin and then as a perl script that eats the normal
>"svnadmin dump" output and spits out XML. :-) People said there was no
>use-case for it. Is this a possible use-case for it? I've not yet done
>the "svnadmin load".
>
Close, but... I think that the xml tags need to be 'in' the repository
rather than attached to fields as part of an output process. The idea is to
have old version data (ignored perhaps) and new version data side by side
within the repository. As the repository grows, those old fossilized bits
of data will remain (nothing drops to the floor), but they may become
increasingly difficult to get at.
An administrator (or paid outside consultant :-) may set up an audit -
usage counting or something on that old data. If it is not being used, then
perhaps a willful whack can be done. But, this set of decisions would be
done at the user level and the timing etc., would be completely independent
of the svn development decision stream.
Think of human DNA. There are lots of bits of unused data hanging around -
probably for millions of years. Things still work. (now if we could only
read those old 'tags'..)
BobG
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jan 1 16:14:57 2003