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

Re: Sparse Directories vs Externals

From: Ryan Schmidt <subversion-2009a_at_ryandesign.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 16:45:47 -0600

On Feb 22, 2009, at 02:08, void pointer wrote:

> Good question, I'm not really sure. To be honest I'm not the one
> wanting to avoid them, I have a co-worker who thinks they are the
> plague. I don't see how relative externals change much. What major
> benefits do they offer? Of course, the biggest one I've found so
> far is that if the repository URL changes the external links do not
> break. But other than that they are pretty much the same as in 1.4.

That is the only advantage I was thinking of. Had this feature been
available when I started using Subversion, it would have helped me
twice already. I have my repository set up on my laptop, and I serve
it with Apache, because I am a web site programmer and sysadmin and
am comfortable administering Apache. My laptop's hostname has changed
once when I upgraded to a new laptop, so relative externals would
have saved me from having to change my externals definitions then.
(So would using "localhost" as the hostname, but I didn't think of
that at the time.) Also, when I moved one of my projects to Google
Code, relative externals would have meant I could just svnsync my
repository there directly; instead, I had to first use svndumptool to
munge the externals definitions.


To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-02-22 23:46:49 CET

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.