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

Re: [Second Request] Re: Stale logs and upgrading to WC-NG

From: Greg Troxel <gdt_at_ir.bbn.com>
Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 12:23:28 -0400

Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> writes:

> Yup. Thanks for the feedback.
>
> On another note, elsewhere in this thread was a call for "maybe use
> something other than 'svn cleanup'?" ... When Hyrum and I suggested
> that command, it was in terms of "clean up your wc, to be usable by
> 1.7 [and yah... it upgrades it]." But in the past day, I believe we
> are going to continue to need the historical concept of "cleanup",
> even in the wc-ng world. To that end, I would propose a --upgrade
> switch to cleanup, rather than a new 'upgrade' subcommand.
>
> Thoughts welcome. I would be very interested in further feedback from
> the community, since our development strategy really changes depending
> on whether we need to run stale logs or not.

When I read that 'svn cleanup' would be how to upgrade a WC, my reaction
was that it was confusing and not a good idea. svn cleanup --upgrade is
not confusing, but does seem a bit odd - 'svn upgrade' seems natural.

I see a difference between the equivalent of running fsck on a working
copy and converting it to a new format, which makes me want a separate
subcommand.

I think it's an important feature that your wc doesn't get upgraded
unless you ask for it. (Speaking as the CM weenie in a large group
hoping to avoid confusion on the part of my people who do not - and
should not have to - pay deep attention to these details.)

------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2057826

  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on 2009-05-04 19:07:21 CEST

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