Good point...
if all goes well, the repository will have upwards of 400-500 small
projects, each of which would only have a few files... if each change to a
file, would cause the revision number to jump, i could have huge gaps in the
revisions numbers of a file between consecutive changes in a given file.
might have to revisit the large .vs small issue. although, from a management
perspective, it would be far easier to have one large repository.
also, does the system have to have a svnserve running for each project?
-bruce
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron [mailto:lists@rzweb.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 12:45 PM
To: bedouglas@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: Large Repository .vs Many Smaller ones..
bruce wrote:
> Hi..
>
> I'm trying to determine if it makes sense to have one very large
> repository.. or to have a series of smaller repositories...
>
> Thoughts/Comments...
I went with small repositories, one for each of my projects. The main
reason was access control (svn://), although that has been fixed in 1.3.
Backing up and restoring also seemed easier, and the big reason was
the revision number. I wanted to have that have some indication of the
progress of the project.
Ron
bruce wrote:
> Hi..
>
> I'm trying to determine if it makes sense to have one very large
> repository.. or to have a series of smaller repositories...
>
> Thoughts/Comments...
>
> Thanks
>
> -Bruce
> bedouglas@earthlink.net
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Apr 27 22:23:31 2006