[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: solo turn <soloturn_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2005-04-15 10:30:33 CEST

On 4/15/05, Moisei <moisei@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, this url was the reason why I posted my "thoughts".
> Definitely, the specification is the absolutely "must-to-be-done"
> development requirement.
> I just try to help on the "pre-specification" stage where, IMHO,
> use-cases are important step.
> Trying to conclude this long thread, here is my vision of the problem:
> On the user side:
> - The feature *is* required by many users, mainly because of the two reasons
> - 1/ disk space usage (that includes the "raw" disk cots, size of
> the repository, etc)
> - 2/ security
> - In both cases, it is talken about user-mistake and not a regular workflow
> - In both cases user interested to eliminate the content of the commited files
> and do not care about directory structure.

i have to admit, if i'd miss something in svn, it is
"obliterate"/"destroy" functionality.

we got around slow working copies and merging/branching problems by
using svk, which works perfect, these guys really did a good job too.

svk uses svn client libs, and stores its data in in the rock-sable svn
datastore .... but it keeps growing ;)


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Apr 16 02:45:24 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.