To begin with, I edited the patch to implement Daniel's (a)-proposal.
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
> Roberto Reale wrote on Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 16:25:10 +0100:
>> Of course I would be glad to modify the patch, but... shall we content
>> ourselves with the somewhat elusive fs-type? :)
> Using fs-type would break backwards compatibility with BDB repositories
> created by svnadmin 1.0.x (or earlier) that have never been dump/load-ed.
> Now, since hot-backup.py was in tools/ in 1.0, it's formally covered by
> the same backwards compatibility promise as everything else.
> However, I don't think there are many people who use a repository
> created by 1.0 that has never been dump/load-ed by any later version of
> svnadmin; that is, I think few if any people would be affected by
> breaking compatibility in this specific case. (And those who *would* be
> affected would receive an error message, as opposed to silent misbehaviour.)
> So, how about we (a) make the patch use fs-type, (b) issue an erratumน
> stating the breakage and providing the workaround?
> Alternatively, we could just find some file that's guaranteed to exist
> in all 1.0 BDB repositories and use that file if fs-type is missing.
> น See notes/api-errata/.
Received on 2015-12-23 11:22:50 CET