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

Re: Thoughts and open questions on patch/dump unification

From: Eric S. Raymond <esr_at_thyrsus.com>
Date: 2004-09-17 19:04:17 CEST

C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>:
> You wanna talk about kludges? Let's talk about kludges.
> svndumpfilter is kludge. Nice itch, wrong scratch.

Heh. I had that reaction when I read about svndumpfilter in the book. Nice
to know it's not just me.

> That said, you are correct to say that it is not true that a dumpfile
> must be applied to an empty repository. As you noted, incremental
> dumps (ala 'svnadmin dump -rX:Y --incremental') do not contain a full
> "history diff", or at least that "diff" is not against an empty
> history.

Correction accepted. First premise, revised: A *full* dump can be viewed as
a history diff applied to the empty tree.

Hmmm, the man page hints that running a load against a *nonempty*
repository may actually do the right thing (that is, apply the
revisions in the dummp file to the repo).

If that's true, we're about 80% of the way to repo sync right now! The
remaining issues are packaging, policy, and how we cope with incremental
dumpfiles that don't apply cleanly.

		Eric S. Raymond
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Sep 17 19:04:59 2004

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.