If you look on http://subversion.tigris.org/roadmap.html, you'll see
that pluggable client-side diff programs are part of the future plan;
that will solve problems when that comes about. Are there any
developers monitoring this right now? Where can we get in on the
requirements phase of this? (I'm scratching my own itch in developing
an OS X diff program right now, and I'd like to make it compatible with
subversion before I get too much further ahead)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew England [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 10:10 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: Any problems w/ very large (10-100MB) binary files?
> Hi Ben,
> Thanks for the background info. That seems to be good to know.
> At 11/12/2004 08:57 PM, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> >Glenn's objection is that an RCS file is 'hackable' by
> hand... that you
> >can manually hack out old versions of a file (if you really
> know what
> >you're doing.) A subversion repository has no way of losing
> data, ever...
> >it's a database that's not hackable. The only recourse is
> to [dump |
> >filter | reload].
> I'm reading Glenn's "objection" differently. I'm hearing the "larger
> picture" as the inability to delete unneeded revisions of a
> file. While in
> many ways it sounds good that SVN will never "lose"
> data/revs...in some
> cases it's bad.
> eg, let's say I'm rev-controlling a lot of content/collateral for a
> product-training class. Lots of documents, powerpoints, and
> even large
> video files. Some of these video files are HUGE. 50MB or
> bigger, some of
> them. If I have multiple revs of each one of those stacked
> up, all of a
> sudden my server's storage capacity is taking a big byte (and
> maybe SVN
> performance does, too?).
> I'd like to go selectively delete some of the older revs of
> the video files
> for I'm safe that I'll never need them again. They've almost
> changed in content from one rev to the next (for various
> reasons: movie
> resolution change, a reshoot, etc)--even though they are
> still addressing
> the same thing and should keep the same name and logical
> revisioning scheme.
> This is the problem I want to solve....and it's what I hear
> Glenn saying,
> too. Maybe I'm simply not understanding things (either Glenn or the
> SVN-specific stuff) correctly?
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Mon Nov 15 17:38:03 2004