On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 09:43:23AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 4/11/06, Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-svn-dev@farside.org.uk> wrote:
> > I like that idea. How about the attached?
> >
> > The only disadvantage of doing it this way is that the application doesn't
> > clean up the working copy lock when it exits, which arguably it could.
> > But I don't see a real problem with that.
>
> How would you upgrade the WC then?
>
You don't. Or at least, not using the client you've compiled in your
development tree. Bear in mind that this is supposed to help people
who have separate development and installed versions of Subversion - the
working copy will be upgraded only when you update your installed version.
> If it's via 'cleanup', well, if you leave a lock behind, then your WC
> gets upgraded... -- justin
>
Er, no. The cleanup comment was just that when the development version
errors out (instead of borking the working copy), it exits with a lock on
the wc, which isn't strictly necessary (it hasn't actually modified the
wc, so it could remove the lock). But it should be a rare occurrence,
so I don't see that as a big problem.
Regards,
Malcolm
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Apr 11 20:47:30 2006