On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 19:51, Hyrum K. Wright
<hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> Hyrum K. Wright wrote on Tue, 27 Jan 2009 at 08:28 -0600:
>>> Blair Zajac wrote:
>>>> So I don't see a bug here, only potentially an improvement to svn cleanup.
>>> 'svn cleanup' will be the method by which pre-1.7 working copies are upgraded
>>> to the new wc-ng format.
>>
>> Not the most intuitive UI.
It should be clear enough to the user:
$ svn st
ERROR: you're running against an old working copy. please run "svn
cleanup" to upgrade to the latest working copy format. Note: this may
take time depending upon the size of your working copy.
$ svn cleanup
....
Or something along those lines.
> Pre-1.7 working copies are a big mess, so 'svn cleanup' actually makes sense.
>
> Seriously, though, the upgrade from 1.6 to 1.7 will need to be explicit, due to
> the large amount of data moving, spanning potentially large directory
> hierarchies. Using 'cleanup' make sense, since part of the upgrade will be to
> run any existing logs, then migrate the data to the new format.
>
>> Also, I'm assuming 1.7 isn't going to be able to support *writing* 1.6-era
>> wc's? (Because if it would, we shouldn't shadow the 'cleanup'
>> functionality, IMO...)
>
> Correct. We're still debating it, but I think in order to do *anything*, read
> or write, with a 1.7 client, you'll need to upgrade. No sitting on the fence
> this time. :)
Yeah. The internal design model for the code is going to be
drastically different. It will be pretty difficult for svn to
on-the-fly map from the old model to the new, and "pretend" that the
higher-level code is looking at a new-style working copy.
Cheers,
-g
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1059952
Received on 2009-01-27 20:13:31 CET