On 12/8/05, John Peacock <jpeacock@rowman.com> wrote:
> Jim Blandy wrote:
> > It's true that this was the original design strategy for Subversion.
> > But that's not a absolute defense. The use case being suggested here
> > --- storing OO files and getting reasonable repository space usage ---
> > is reasonable.
>
> What about other composite file types and the "I want to store .tar.gz
> files efficiently" argument? Where do you draw the line on embedding
> application file format specific routines in a general purpose tool like
> Subversion. Why is this Subversion's problem to begin with and why
> should _we_ solve it?
We draw the line around doing a good job handling as many reasonable
use cases as we can see how.
What's wrong here is that your real answer is, "I can't see how to do
that well, without causing other problems" --- a perfectly fine answer
--- but what you've written is, "This tool isn't supposed to do that."
Those are different arguments. If we could see a good solution (I
think making OO use "rsyncable" compression is a great solution), then
we *would* want to do it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Dec 8 21:31:40 2005