On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 09:25:33AM +0200, Alan Barrett wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Greg Stein wrote:
> > Nope. Users cannot generally downgrade their client to run a cleanup.
> > Historically, we have always auto-upgraded the working copies, even
> > with stale logs in them.
> >
> > The 1.7 upgrade process is too invasive and time-consuming, so we
> > decided to have a manual process ('svn upgrade'). But moving forward,
> > the intent is to continue an auto-upgrade mechanism even with stale
> > workqueues.
>
> The auto-upgrade has always bothered me. I'd much prefer to have a
> command line action (e.g. "svn upgrade") to upgrade the working copy,
> and for the default behaviour to be that the client prints an error
> message suggesting that the user should run "svn upgrade".
I have repeatedly heard similar complaints and would therefore prefer
an explicit 'svn upgrade' upon 1.x to 1.y upgrades for working copies
starting with 1.7. And I have never heard anyone asking for the auto-upgrade
feature to be kept.
The CLI client can print an error. GUI clients can show a window prompting
the user whether to run an upgrade or bail out.
This does not harm people using a single client much, but helps users
who use several clients simultaneously a lot (they don't have to get
fresh WCs to continue getting work done).
We could also add a configuration option to ~/.subversion/config that
causes working copies to always be auto-upgraded, defaulting to 'off'.
Stefan
Received on 2010-07-01 11:34:42 CEST