Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> brane@xbc.nu writes:
> > Arlie Davis wrote:
> > > I think this entire proposal to move away from XML and to an ad-hoc format
> > > is a very bad one.
> > >
> > > I've seen many projects use XML for large datasets, and do so very
> > > efficiently. Why not try to improve the existing implementation, rather
> > > than inventing a new format and going through all the unnecessary pain?
> > >
> > I certainly agree in essence, and prophesy lots of horrible problems
> > because of this change, but ...
>
> Would you care to elaborate on the "lots of horrible problems" you
> foresee? Or, are you just going to wait to one of those arrives, then
> telling me "I knew that would happen"? Please?
>
[...]
> Anyway, the change is merged to trunk now. It is still possible to go
> back in time, of course - it will just cause problems for those who
> follow trunk, who will have to either manually downgrade their WCs, or
> ditch them.
I think you've answered my concerns yourself. :)
Looking just at the Windows world, getting svn command-line, TSVN and
(possibly) AnkhSVN all upgraded and synchronized will probably be a pain.
But no more of a pain than any other WC format bump would have been.
That's why I never considered a veto.
I'm not entirely happy with the change, given that you _could_ have made
entries file parsing faster without changing the format, but an uneasy
-0 is the best I can do, so I won't oppose it.
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Apr 24 15:43:08 2006