Re: Another working copy library

On 1/26/07, Danny van Heumen <danny.vanheumen@hccnet.nl> wrote:
> I wanted to say that, because severability isn't possible anymore, the
> structure of the WC is static. Which means that if you're 6 levels deep
> inside the WC, you can still assume that the root of the WC is 6 levels up.
> So you can take advantage of this by recording (at least) that you're 6
> levels deep (or with a relative path pointing 6 levels up) to point to
> the root of the WC.
> This wasn't possible before because of (the possibility of implicit)
> severability.

If we're going the root of "no important information in .svn
directories", then we really shouldn't require .svn directories for
the sake of a tiny optimization.

There are operations (like upgrading poorly-modularized software
(think WordPress) inside my repository) that I just can't bear to do
using the svn client which is trivial in svk, because of the .svn
directories. And then there's the OS X bundle issue, where
applications that store their data as directories have to avoid
deleting and rewriting the directory to be svn-compatible. (And
again, this is not a problem for svk's working copy.)

If we're going to rid ourselves of distributed metadata, we might as
well completely rid ourselves of it.

--dave

-- 
David Glasser | glasser_at_mit.edu | http://www.davidglasser.net/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org