On 10/4/07, David Glasser <glasser@davidglasser.net> wrote:
> On 10/4/07, David Glasser <glasser@davidglasser.net> wrote:
> > On 10/3/07, Karl Fogel <kfogel@red-bean.com> wrote:
> > > "Daniel L. Rall" <dlr@finemaltcoding.com> writes:
> > > >> Hmmm, it seems init_adm() does take a 'depth' parameter, so we might
> > > >> be able to swing this. I'll spend a few hours on it. If it's done by
> > > >> the end of that, great; if not, I'll at least know whether doing it is
> > > >> hard or easy.
> > > >
> > > > Don't bother. As painful as it is, we have to bump the format number.
> > >
> > > Sigh. I think I have to agree. There might be weird and surprising
> > > behaviors if different subdirs in your working copy were to have
> > > different format numbers. It just seems like a Bad Road to go down.
> >
> > Um, this is our working copy format. You know, the one where all the
> > information is scattered randomly over a million directories... I'm
> > pretty sure that the current upgrade code only upgrades one directory
> > at a time anyway! So this is not as insane as you think.
>
> Having taken a look at the code, I am confident that it would be
> pretty straightforward *technically* to bump the number to 9 but
> preserve current format-8 working copies (or even never make format-9
> working copies) until there is a non-infinite depth. Having
> varied-version working copies should not be a technical problem at
> all. Of course, it could be a social problem as Jack mentions in that
> it makes the "line" between 1.4-compatible and 1.4-incompatible wcs a
> little blurrier...
Suppose some sub-folder has been bumped and a 1.4 client does a
command from the root. What will happen?
--
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Oct 4 20:40:51 2007