On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 09:49:01AM +0100, Greg Thomas wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 09:53:15 -0300, Andreas Hasenack
> <andreas@mandriva.com.br> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 08:31:19AM +0100, Greg Thomas wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 22:31:38 -0500, "Matt Sickler"
> >> <crazyfordynamite@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Maybe its best to rethink that "must be stored as a tar/bz2" requirement.
> >>
> >> It might be better to store it as it's component files and a script to
> >> generate the tar file.
> >
> >But my original question remains: is there a, let's say, "less worse"
> >way to update binary blobs?
>
> svn will only transfer differences. If your binary blob is similar to
> the previous version (e.g. a .gz instead of a .bz2) you'll get a
> better effect (less bandwidth & diskspace used).
In all the cases I showed? "svn del old + svn add new" and
"svn rename old2new + overwrite with new"? That's my main concern,
because currently I'm doing the former (del old + add new).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jul 4 14:20:10 2007