On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>wrote:
> [ fixed leading "> " signs ]
>
> Hyrum K. Wright wrote on Thu, 27 May 2010 at 16:17 -0500:
> > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Bob Archer <Bob.Archer_at_amsi.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Will per-directory .svn's remain as an option in 1.7+? (I thought
> > > > > yes...)
> > > >
> > > > Not to my knowledge. I wasn't aware of the use case (aside from
> > > > severable working copies) that engendered this need.
> > > >
> > >
> > > How are the 1.7 WC libraries going to determine if a folder is part of
> a
> > > WC? Are they going to have to walk the file system backwards all the
> way to
> > > the root? That seems like a bit of a perf hit for large projects with a
> deep
> > > level of nested folders?
> > >
> >
> > "deeply nested" usually means only 10-15 folders. Recursing up to find
> the
> > root of the working copy is a one-time operation during the course of an
> > invocation of 'svn' on that working copy. As such, it's essentially a
> free
> > operation.
> >
>
> How would recursing interact with symlinks into working copy dirs?
> (I know we it have been discussed before; a pointer would be appreciated)
>
> eg:
>
> svn co $SVN_TRUNK trunk
> ln -s trunk/notes notes
> cd notes
> svn st
>
Isn't this just a subset of the "severable working copy" use case?
-Hyrum
Received on 2010-05-27 23:34:48 CEST