Re: Re: DB format vs svn versions

I've reviewed the changes file for 0.37.0 for schema related content. (Incidentally, I can't find such a file in the win32 0.35.0 binary release. Should it be there?)

This file does a great job of indicating schema changes (at least as far back as ~0.14.0).

However, it doesn't say that 0.34.0 implements "schema 3" and that the db schema can be determined by reading file xyz in directory abc of any given repo.

I suppose I am requesting a documentation enhancement, and perhaps a minor adjustment to the format of a db to provide the information as discussed. [Self-documenting, readily determined]

I feel it may be useful to the public at large in 3-5+ years when dealing with orphaned, improperly archived, or otherwise neglected svn repos.

So I will pose this question:

I am willing to propose patches for 2 things:
1. Enhancing the "format" file to include descriptive text indicating what tools created it.
2. Documentation patches to applicable docs discussing these issues.

In your opinion, would they be welcome?

BTW, thank you for taking the time to work this issue with me. I've used svn for ~20 months, and well... nice.

Judd

>From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@collab.net>
>Date: 2004/02/10 Tue PM 04:13:56 GMT
>To: judd.jenne@charter.net
>CC: users@subversion.tigris.org
>Subject: Re: Re: DB format vs svn versions
>
>On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 22:58, judd.jenne@charter.net wrote:
>
>>Would it be feasible to expand the "format" contents to include the
>>revision string of the current svn tools/libs used to generate the db?
>
>Well, I suppose it could be done...
>
>
>>This would provide sufficient compatibility information for a dump-restore
migration.
>
>... but is there a problem? Are there throngs of users out there with
>multitudes of old repositories, confused about how to upgrade? I've
>never seen it.
>
>The fs schema changed several times over the 4-year march to 1.0, but
>it's not going to change again for a quite a long time, till at least
>2.0.
>
>Schema migration was never much of a problem to begin with, anyway. The
>status page clearly describes when a dump/load is necessary, and so does
>the CHANGES file (a.k.a release notes), and so do the release
>announcement emails.
>
>
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Feb 11 18:55:15 2004