Misha Aizatulin wrote:
>>>> Yes, the files I want to reuse are not versioned in a public
>>>> repository, nor do I see any reason for them to be.
>> Well if you don't want them to be versioned then Subversion has
>> nothing to do with them.
>
> I guess I wasn't clear: I don't want them versioned separately, but of
> course I want to commit them to the two repositories I have mentioned.
> The problem is that I cannot and I don't want to point from one
> repository to the other.
>
>> Ok, then scratch externals entirely. Commit the file to both
>> repositories and invent a way to keep them synchronized.
>
> But hasn't this way been invented a long time ago? I think this is
> exactly what symbolic links are for! The only obstacle is that svn
> chokes on symbolic links and that's why I am discussing it here.
It doesn't choke. It was deliberately designed to handle symbolic links. If
you re-symlink a symlink, then Subversion will see the change and allow you to
version path the symlink points to just as Subversion version's file content
changes.
> Is there any reason not to implement following symbolic links? Is it a
> design decision or just due to the fact that no one requested it so far?
> Again, shall I write a feature request?
How would the feature work? How would you tell Subversion to follow this link?
This is the first request I've heard that you want to follow symlinks.
How would Subversion work with updating that file atomically? What happens if
you have two svn updates running at the same time that want to update the file
at the location the symlink references?
BTW, it takes more work in the code to follow them then not too, because you
have to check if it's a symlink or not and then use readlink() to get what the
symlink points to.
Blair
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2373396
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-07-21 22:37:22 CEST