Re: Is mod_dav_svn safe for use in a threaded MPM?
Eric Gillespie wrote:
> Malcolm Rowe <email@example.com> writes:
>>> I haven't thought about compatibility, but what about calling the
>>> new database 'activities.d' instead of 'activities'?
>> We'd either need to create the new directory on-demand (realistically,
>> we'd do it whenever we needed to write a new association) or alternatively
>> bump the repository format number and retain the backward-compatibility
> Which brings us to another peeve of mine. This has nothing to do
> with the repository or filesystem format. mod-dav-svn is just
> stuffing data into the repository directory behind its back, and
> svn_repos_create incestuously plays along by creating the 'dav'
> directory. Maybe we should do something about this while we're
> at it.
This has always bothered me, too.
But let me back a little more out of the box and ask -- is there any
particular reason why we need the activities table at all? I mean, if all
it provides is a mapping of "DAV activity" to "Subversion txn" why can't we
just use the Subversion txn name in the WebDAV protocol?
C. Michael Pilato <firstname.lastname@example.org>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on Thu Apr 5 20:02:47 2007
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev