On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm issuing a second request for comment here. IMO, this is a pretty
> dramatic departure from prior release strategy, and (for a few users)
> it will be a pain to grab an old client to clean out the stale logs.
> (or to do a new checkout, and figure out what changes to port over)
>
> We're getting *very* close to the point where we're going to start on
> a major hack/slash against the loggy code. We need to be sure that
> people are bought into the position of, "oops. you crashed at a bad
> spot. then upgraded your client. you're in a tough spot".
>
> I'll assume "it's a total edge case, so yah. any stale logs prevent an upgrade."
>
> If the problem space is unclear to anybody, then please let me know,
> and Hyrum/myself can explain further.
My concern is folks who might be using bundled SVN installs like
Debian/Ubuntu. Consider if/when they upgrade from one distro version
to the next ('apt-get dist-upgrade'), then the WCs might all end up in
funny land if someone had a stale WC and didn't know it. What can we
do for those users?
So, yah, I'm a tad uncomfortable about this. -- justin
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2058580
Received on 2009-05-04 20:00:35 CEST