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

Re: svn commit: r1869870 - /subversion/trunk/INSTALL

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2019 13:27:05 +0000

Disclaimer: Most of the below is just my own opinion. There's plenty of
latitude in this.

Nathan Hartman wrote on Sun, Nov 17, 2019 at 00:02:34 -0500:
> You need Berkeley DB only if you are building support for
> Subversion's older BDB repository storage back-end. The BDB
> back-end is deprecated and not recommended, but is still
> available. The newer and recommended back-end, FSFS, does
> not require Berkeley DB.

How about changing "not recommended" to "not recommended for new repositories"?
For example:

"The BDB backend has been deprecated and may be removed in Subversion 2.0.
We recommend to use the FSFS backend for all new repositories."

Plus a reference to the book, if needed.

> In particular, you need Berkeley DB if you are building:
> * A Subversion server that supports BDB repositories.
> * A Subversion client that can access BDB repositories via
> the file:// URI scheme.

s/supports/serves/ ?

I'm not sure, but perhaps change "if" to "if and only if" and remove the next
set of bullets?

Point out that 'svnadmin info' will say whether a repository is FSFS or BDB?
(That subcommand was added in 1.9 so we can assume it here.)

> You do not need Berkeley DB if you are building:
> * A Subversion server without support for BDB repositories.
> * A Subversion client that accesses Subversion repositories of
> any format (BDB or otherwise), when such access is provided
> by a Subversion server that supports that format.
> ]]]
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Nathan
Received on 2019-11-17 14:27:21 CET

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