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

Re: EXTERNALS table -- good or bad?

From: Neels J Hofmeyr <neels_at_elego.de>
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 01:51:55 +0200

On 10/06/2011 11:39 PM, Alexey Neyman wrote:
> Hi Neels,
> Would this help 'svn commit' descend into external directories and check them
> in?

In fact, I have a patch in progress that addresses this. However, the
question I am asking in this thread goes deeper and is independent from how
externals are treated during commit. The fundamental issue, that commit
could not handle multiple working copies in one call, has been fixed, so it
is possible to advance here.

FYI, the current plans are: Subversion by default ignores all externals from
commit recursion (both file- and dir-externals); But, if --include-externals
is passed to 'svn commit', all externals are included in recursion. I.e. all
of file- and dir externals, be they nested below unversioned directories or
other working copies, will be included by a commit with --include-externals.

But I can say with certainty that this feature/change will not be released
before Subversion 1.8.0.

While this does not depend on an EXTERNALS table, it would run faster with
an EXTERNALS table. But maybe not that much faster as would justify a given
amount of caching complexity.


Received on 2011-10-07 01:52:36 CEST

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.