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

Re: Another request for obliterate...

From: Mike Dewhirst <miked_at_dewhirst.com.au>
Date: 2005-04-15 08:15:10 CEST

André Pönitz wrote:
> Tim Hill wrote:
>>Apart from all the oddities that David mentions,
>>what are the *real* needs for obliterate? I can only think of a few...


>>My vote on obliterate is NO.

I think the original request for obliterate was to deal with very large
binary files, earlier versions of which are surplus to requirements.

My understanding is that svn doesn't try to store deltas for binary data
the way it does for text (source) files. IIRC it stores the entire file
each time.

If that is correct, there might be an argument for Binary_Obliterate.

The caveat for such a facility would perhaps need to be along the lines
of admin-only and oyohbi

Thinking about what I wrote above, maybe binary files could be marked by
the user as "only_store_the_latest_version_obliterate_all_previous". If
so, there would be no need for an obliterate anything.



To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Apr 15 08:17:22 2005

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.