> Hi Julian et al,
> Yes, the new 1.7 feature sounds very promising. I was wondering what
> WC-NG stands for but I think I get the idea.
> I'll tell you the one way in which that might not completely solve
> the use-case that I have in mind, and that is doing a series of
> partial exports from multiple repositories. Basically I am building
> up a server from a series of images that come from different
> repositories due to ownership, permission and licensing
> limitations. So I might run a series of 10 or 20 exports from
> different sections of various repositories, to build up a given
> server (e.g. appliance). Using export, there are no conflicts, even
> if some of those exports put files into the same target
> folders. (Take as a worst-case example, targeting the
> c:\windows\system32 folder. )
> Would your 1.7 WC-NG feature be okay with a shared .svn folder (e.g.
> c:\.svn\ ) with details about exports relating to multiple
> repositories? If yes, *great*.
No, I don't expect it will cope with that exact scenario. WC-NG is
being designed toward having the ability to manage different parts of
the WC coming from different repositories, but that ability is not
likely to be functional at first and it will not allow the different
parts to overlap in the way you are doing.
Received on 2010-07-27 18:35:22 CEST