Unless its an ironic meta-commentary!
On 17/07/2010, Andy Levy <andy.levy_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 08:20, Felix Saphir <felix.saphir_at_kantarmedia.de>
> wrote:
>> Andy Levy schrieb:
>>> On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 02:42, Alexander <lazybadger_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jul 17, 5:12 am, Mukund <kmukun..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I suggest that tortoise svn binaries be source controlled by
>>>>> subversion so that i can simply say SVN update on C:\Program
>>>>> Files\TortoiseSVN\ to update the current working copy instead of
>>>>> opening a browser and reinstalling the application
>>>>
>>>> STRONGLY disagree
>>>> 1. Repo for binaries will be giant size very soon
>>>> 2. It's harder to support on user's side
>>>> 3. Hand-made operation have better manageability
>>>> 4. HTTP file-dowloads are(?) more bullet-proof than svn update for
>>>> single big file
>>>
>>> 5. In a corporate environment, we want to have full control over what
>>> updates to what software are pushed out when.
>>
>> But if the file size was displayed, users would instantanenously know
>> what's been changed. Or if any backup files were checked in.
>
> I think you're in the wrong thread.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=4061&dsMessageId=2634435
>
> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail:
> [users-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].
>
--
Sent from my mobile device
------------------------------------------------------
http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=4061&dsMessageId=2634436
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].
Received on 2010-07-17 14:38:52 CEST