[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: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:17:08 +0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name]
> Sent: dinsdag 16 september 2008 15:50
> To: Stefan Sperling
> Cc: dev_at_subversion.tigris.org
> Subject: Re: Base text files, re: IRC chat
> Stefan Sperling wrote on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 at 15:27 +0200:
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 12:35:17AM +0200, Bert Huijben wrote:
> > > I really wouldn't recommend using (2) as the Windows default. In
> many
> > > corporate environments ~/ is in the roaming user profile.
> (Automatically
> > > locally cached and sometimes automatically merged when a user logs
> on onto
> > > different machines at the same time). And in most of these cases
> the size of
> > > the roaming profiles is pretty limited (100 MB max at one of our
> largest
> > > customers)
> >
> > This is a good point.
> >
> > Do we want defaults to differ between platforms?
> Not unless we have to. And I'm not sure we want them to differ here.
> > Because on *nix, with the concept of $HOME, (2) makes a lot of sense.
> Well, Windows also has that concept, %USERPROFILE%. And having quotas
> on it isn't a limitation unique to Windows :)
> In Bert's case, these people have working copies somewhere, and what we
> want is to store the metadata there rather than at the %USERPROFILE%,
> right? Wouldn't setting --config-dir (via env var?) to a path sibling
> to
> the working copies achieve that effect as well?

It's just that none of these users use the CLI as primary client and getting
all GUIs to pass the same config directory setting is not very likely. If
they use --config dir they pass their own folder and not one shared with all
other clients.

Asking from all users to explicitly set or pass a storage location only
proves the point that we can't provide a new/better sensible default for a
central metadata store.

By the way, doesn't your recommendation break our c library API contract?

Someone linking to the 1.4/1.5 library doesn't expect us to store Gigabytes
of data in their roaming profile when they only access a working copy on a
network share.

I see no problem in the user taking the initiative in moving the metadata
store. But why would we as library developers take the initiative to move it
to another location, of which can't say it is any better than the original


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-09-16 19:25:41 CEST

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.