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

RE: Auto Upgrade Behavior

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 01:58:51 +0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:stsp_at_elego.de]
> Sent: zondag 26 augustus 2012 21:39
> To: Greg Stein
> Cc: Branko ─îibej; dev_at_subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Auto Upgrade Behavior
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 02:29:45PM -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
> > On Aug 25, 2012 8:08 PM, "Branko ─îibej" <brane_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 26.08.2012 00:31, Greg Stein wrote:
> > > > In the past, we used auto-upgrade because it "just worked". Most
> > > > users don't need or want to worry about working copy formats. They
> > > > just want
> > svn
> > > > to work.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think we should be making things more difficult for the
> > majority in
> > > > order to help a few users who use multiple clients. That is backwards.
> > :-(
> > >
> > > Well, evidence appears to suggest that users who use multiple
> > > clients are in fact the majority. Hearsay evidence, but that's the
> > > only kind I see hereabouts.
> >
> > I'd call it a vocal minority. We've got millions of users. I can't see
> > the majority using multiple clients. Nobody runs into issues using a
> > single client, so there is no need to speak up.
> I keep getting these complaints often. Mostly from users I personally talk to
> during workshops, consulting, etc. Dunno how much of our user population
> they represent. However it would be nice for me and them if auto-upgrade
> was disabled by default. Because the problem would be solved for them, and
> I could spend the time during my workshops talking about more interesting
> stuff than why we auto-upgrade and how to avoid the pitfalls. My desire to
> make this changed is based on real user feedback. I wouldn't want to make it
> if these people didn't request it.

For AnkhSVN I got complaints about auto upgrades for 1.5 -> 1.6, but I got far more complaints about the not auto upgrades to 1.7.

I don't think the users really know about the problems of the other choice. They just see a problem with the way they use it now and say that it should be the other way. They haven't tried it the other way and checked if this would have caused bigger other problems.

Most AnkhSVN users have multiple clients, but we educated them for 1.5, 1.6 that they should upgrade clients like TortoiseSVN at the same time and for my users that is not a problem.

As Greg noted: The discussion on these topics on our list is really about the vocal minorities. If you just look at reports on our mailing lists the upgrade for 1.6 to 1.7 seldom works well, while in practice at least hundreds of thousands of users performed this upgrade -probably each on multiple working copies- without any problems.

Received on 2012-08-27 01:59:34 CEST

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