On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 05:16:22PM -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> I have no thread handy, but it's been discussed over and over in the
> wc-ng design as an 'eventual feature' to be implemented. It's
I also do not remember reading about svn edit before.
> basically imitating perforce: the entire working copy is read-only.
There exist so many free version control systems never mentioned on this
list that I really wonder why people use commercial ones most never
> When you want to edit a file, you run 'svn edit file', which makes the
> file read-write and registers this fact in sqlite. Then, when you run
If I would be required to call svn add I would stop using Subversion and
switch to quilt. It has the advantage of allowing me to change previous
patches. I still hope git has this feature as well (and I think this applies
to mercurial as well) but I never found the time to properly learn it :-(
> 'svn status', 'svn diff', 'svn commit', etc. there's no need to crawl
> the tree trying to discover local edits; you just ask the database
> which files to stat. It makes things shockingly fast, and while it
> sounds horribly annoying and restrictive to a veteran CVS or SVN user,
> it's actually a really nice way to work.
The following may be a naive question and I really don't know this topic
very well, nevertheless it wasn't dicussed before and could give you some
Isn't this a problem of the filesystem if comparing file modification times is
so slow? Is there really no filesystem (Reiser, ext3/4, XFS, ...) which allows
fast access to this information? Or do you fear using filesystem specific
attributes for the working copy (such as sorting files via modification time)
(if they exist at all)?
Why don't you write down the preferred filesystem parameters, suggest users the
best one for Subversion and file wishlist bugs for still missing features?
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-10-26 15:20:21 CET