On Oct 14, 2005, at 12:24, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
> (1) "svn up", "svn status" run sub-connections for externals. On
> link with
> big latencity and "svn+ssh" used as protocol it is not very fast
> operation.
> It is needed in general case, but in my case externasl point into
> same repo.
>
"svn status" is a local operation and does not use the network.
"svn up" does indeed need a second connection for the externals,
because externals are always defined as an absolute URL, and could
thus be to a completely different repository, as you know. There is
an open feature request to allow relative links in external
definitions, and perhaps then this will make it easy to share the
primary connection. Or maybe not, I don't know.
> (2) "svn ci" doesn't follow externals. So, If I change application
> (add new
> code) and change library (fix bug, which was found by this new
> applictaion's
> code), I need two "svn ci", or even more than two, because
> different parts
> of library (code, language files, etc) is injected in different
> points in
> application tree.
>
As I understand it, that's intentional. Using your example, the
library is a separate entity from the application which uses the
library. So the correct course of action is to have the application
use a *particular version* of the library (set the svn:externals
definition to a specific tag of the library, or to a specific
branch). You then go and change the library, and make a new tag. If
you're making an incompatible change in the library, presumably you
first make a new branch. Then you can update the application to make
use of the changes in the library, by changing the svn:externals
definition to point to the new version of the library that you're now
using.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Oct 14 13:27:50 2005