I'd like to state that I'd really like to see the storage of text bases made
optional. In particular I'd like to see the following three
user-configurable options offered:
a) text bases as they are (ie no change)
b) no text bases
c) no text bases, but hash of the file stored in .svn directory - this would
allow you to see that a file has been changed, although you wouldn't be able
to do diffs.
There is a fourth option:
d) compressed text bases
I have no objection to this, but it's not useful to me.
Why would I like this? Well it's because I am using subversion in a slightly
unusual way: I've put my Windows "My Documents" folder under version
control. I have several repositories, including one for "My Pictures" - this
is the one where optional text bases would be really useful. And you see why
I'm not bothered about compressed text bases: they wouldn't buy anything for
Why did I do this? Well, my view of backup is having multiple redundant
copies of files. When I copy my photos to my PC I then want to (eventually)
propagate them to my partner's PC, my NAS, two external USB drives (one
which lives at the office as an off-site backup) etc. I haven't found any
backup software that has this usage model, but subversion handles it like a
treat. The only downside is the storage space taken up by the text bases.
Additionally I rarely edit my photos, but I do organise them into
directories, and also create directories of slideshows. Again subversion
handles this like a treat.
The text bases are not too much of a problem on the PCs or the NAS, but they
are problematic for external USB drives (I like to use self-powered 2.5 inch
drives which are of limited capacity), and they are extremely problematic if
I want to use subversion to copy a slideshow onto a USB keyfob.
(Oh, by the way, I also use subversion for software development.)
Received on Thu Aug 3 22:32:18 2006