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

Re: Sparse checkouts suggestion

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_apache.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 18:05:22 +0200

On 19.09.2017 13:24, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, 19 Sep 2017 06:03 +0200:
>> On 19.09.2017 00:59, Paul Hammant wrote:
>>> I like the `svn co svn://vcs/trunk --view foo`. Well maybe if in a
>>> following `svn up` it would *remember the current view*, it would be good.
>> I don't think there's any need to remember the "current view": a sparse
>> working copy already maintains its topology, so the view spec is only
>> needed on checkout to construct the sparse WC (and then update to
>> explicitly change it, etc.)
> What if the view excludes A/D, and then the wc is updated from a
> revision where A/D doesn't exist, to a revision where it does?

I still say we shouldn't remember the view spec; the WC should remember
the topology. Your example might involve the WC remembering exclusions
for nonexistent paths. Yes, that would be a WC format change.

The reason for /not/ remembering the viewspec -- which would also
involve a format change, IMO -- is that, whilst as in your example the
viewspec could exclude an as yet nonexistent A/D, the user may want to
include it in her working copy. If the WC remembers nonexistent
excludes, that translates to a simple 'svn update A/D'. If the WC
remembers the view spec, it would require changing that viewspec (or,
more likely, creating a new one), otherwise the next update would
exclude the item again.

-- Brane
Received on 2017-09-19 18:05:26 CEST

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