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

Re: Base text files, re: IRC chat

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:03:44 +0300 (Jerusalem Daylight Time)

Stefan Sperling wrote on Mon, 15 Sep 2008 at 19:43 +0200:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 01:10:14PM -0400, Karl Fogel wrote:
> > Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> writes:
> > > Karl Fogel wrote on Mon, 15 Sep 2008 at 12:18 -0400:
> > >> 1. The metadata knows where the working copy/copies live, by absolute
> > >> path, as Greg says.
> > >>
> > >> 2. If you plain mv or cp a working copy, it stops working, BUT...
> > >>
> > >> 3. ...the error message from Subversion points out that the working
> > >> copy may have been mv'd or cp'd, and offers a command to
> > >> "re-register" it with the metadata store. This command is the
> > >> metadata store's chance to clean up its reference counts
> > >> w.r.t. that working copy.
> > >
> > > ... and also offers another command to un-register the previous location.
> >
> > I was thinking the same command would do both. That is, it would gather
> > all the knowledge it could, from inspection and (perhaps) from the user,
> > and DTRT.
> >

Right: if it records all WCs it knows about, then we don't need a command
"unregister wc X" -- we just need a command "unregister all non-existing
wc's". (What Greg suggested originally...)

> > > And a command to list all WCs it knows about, maybe (so you can figure out
> > > what needs to be unregistered).
> >
> > Urgk. Well, let's see if we really need that one first.
>
> I fail to see what's wrong with a mandatory .svn at the root of
> a working copy

+1 on this part of the sentence...

> pointing to a meta data store to handle the
> moved-working-copy use case.
>

Moving the wc won't update the reference in the centralised metadata
storage to the wc?

> I'd say manual user intervention should only be required if the
> working copy was moved / copied, *and* the .svn directory in the
> root of a working copy does not point to a valid metadata store.
>
> For that case, only, the above plan sounds fine to me. But why make
> life difficult for users if we can simply equip the working copy
> with the necessary information it needs after having been moved?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-09-15 20:04:06 CEST

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