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

Re: current plan for WC

From: Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2008 14:11:27 -0500

C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
>> And let me throw a question back at you: why do *you* say any change
>> to Subversion need to add benefit without development/release risk? If
>> the change to internals get us on a path for long-term benefit, then
>> that seems more than appropriate.
> In risk/benefit analysis, it seems that benefit without risk is all good;
> benefit with risk can be tolerated; but risk without benefit is a hard sell.
> Here's a dialogue I would expect to see:
> User: "Why does Subversion suddenly need sqlite?"
> Devs: "Because we plan to use it in the future to bring you some
> seriously cool benefits, performance boosts, and so on. It's
> gonna rock, man!"
> User: "But why does Subversion need it *now*?"
> Devs: ___________ <-- Greg's debate-winning answer here :-)

If we get fs-rep-sharing into a mergable state at some point, that would
introduce a dependency on sqlite (for FSFS). We could use that as the selling
point for sqlite, and we'd also get Greg's changes for "free".


Received on 2008-10-01 21:11:48 CEST

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