RE: [Subclipse-users] Why so slow?

"Rob Oxspring" <roxspring@imapmail.org> wrote on 06/30/2006 12:22:35 PM:

> Is there any reason for choosing svn status -N for this quick check?
> Wouldn't a svn info tell you just as much but faster? For that matter
you
> could probably get away with checking for the presence of a .svn or _svn
> directory?
>
> Just thinking out loud :)

I do not even know why we do the check. The code pre-dates my
involvement. My guess would be that the CVS plugin does something similar
and it was copied. Which is not to say that what the CVS plugin checks is
not much more efficient. I know there was a time when svn info was not
efficient. I think it contacted the repository.

On the surface, it looks like we could just take the check out completely.
 The scenario it is guarding against seems absurd to me to worry about.

Is the startup time your main/only problem? If everything is slow, all
the time, then it doesn't make much sense to focus on this. I brought it
up in case startup was your main issue.

Mark

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subclipse.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jun 30 18:51:08 2006