RE: Summary: URL rev proposals

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 23:47, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Agreed. Greg Stein of course is right that it's RFC3253-compliant to change
> the version URI namespace as long as the same URL never ever identifies a
> different version. That's what RFC3253 absolutely requires. In particular,
> versions may get deleted. That means that the URL may get unmapped again,
> but it will *still* identify the same version (it's just that the server
> won't have any representations for that version anymore).

Question for the group about Subversion's current behavior:

If you svnadmin dump, filter, and load a partial branch of the
repository, does the repository version number (URI, in this discussion)
remain stable, even if many of the revisions affected parts of the
repository that have been removed? Or does the repository get new
version numbers, incrementing only with changes in the branch of the
repository loaded?

Cheers,
John

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Aug 17 18:42:33 2003