On Oct 5, 2007, at 3:21 PM, Daniel L. Rall wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007, David Glasser wrote:
>
>> On 10/4/07, Mark Phippard <markphip@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 10/4/07, David Glasser <glasser@davidglasser.net> wrote:
>>>> On 10/4/07, Mark Phippard <markphip@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> What if we held off the bump until we would be writing the WC?
>>>>> One of
>>>>> the problems with 1.4 is anything that touched the WC rewrote it.
>>>>> When you are on Windows, TortoiseSVN will eventually touch
>>>>> every WC on
>>>>> your hard drive, depending on what you have built up in its
>>>>> cache and
>>>>> how often you just browse your drive with Windows Explorer.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you had to at least do an update/commit/checkout that would
>>>>> help a
>>>>> little. Then you could at least be somewhat careful and not
>>>>> have it
>>>>> happen.
>>>>
>>>> I'm pretty sure that this is the status quo --- the format is only
>>>> upgraded if a write lock is taken out.
>>>
>>> Maybe I am wrong, but I thought with 1.4, even something like status
>>> updated the WC.
>>
>> Nope; just tested.
>
> Hmm, then why all the noise about third-party clients, especially
> those
> integrated into GUI shells (e.g. TortoiseSVN and SCPlugin),
> automatically
> upgrading your WC while browsing your local file system?
Might TSVN actually do a "status -u", which might do the WC update?
Just speculating, here.
-==-
Jack Repenning
Chief Technology Officer
CollabNet, Inc.
8000 Marina Boulevard, Suite 600
Brisbane, California 94005
office: +1 650.228.2562
mobile: +1 408.835.8090
raindance: +1 877.326.2337, x844.7461
aim: jackrepenning
skype: jrepenning
Received on Sat Oct 6 00:43:50 2007