[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: [RFC] FSFS filesystem options (long, sorry)

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_red-bean.com>
Date: 2007-03-05 20:22:50 CET

Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-svn-dev@farside.org.uk> writes:
> Why do you think that it'd be easier to make it the default for 1.6?
> (I'm really not sure myself - I can see advantages to making it on- and
> off-by-default). Because the hacky tools would have grown to understand
> it?

Greg may have a different answer, but:

Because the previous release, 1.5, will grok the format, thus greatly
reducing the chances that someone will encounter a new repository yet
not have the right Subversion to handle it.

> Sure. Offline is the key here, though, even if it is a quick operation.
> (We probably _should_ write a script though).

Just to play devil's advocate: why not just have Subversion
auto-upgrade repositories? It can lock others out while it does it.
It's not clear to me that the upgrade has to be atomic, even. You go
looking for the revision in the new place, you don't find it, so next
you go looking in the old place...

I gues what I'm trying to say is: just because a repository format
change feels intuitively like a big deal, doesn't mean we must assume
it actually is one. Let's think creatively. It may be that this can
all happen completely transparently to the user/administrator. If
that's possible and not too costly, it's certainly the right course.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Mar 5 20:23:04 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.