On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:08:53AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 9/28/2010 9:49 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 04:42:50PM +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >>Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote on Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 23:05:20 -0400:
> >>>dump is very useful for using a new format, or optimizing the relevant
> >>>database. It doesn't bring along your config tools. In fact, I'd love
> >>>to see the "svnadmin hotcopy" factored, first to transfer the
> >>>database, and separately to transfer configurations.
> >>
> >>i.e., to copy the hooks/ and conf/ directories too? Sounds like
> >>a reasonable feature request...
> >>
> >>Feel free to file an issue, or send a patch, etc.
> >
> >Such an issue already exists:
> >http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3299
>
> It would be nice if svnsync tracked and transported them as well,
> but kept them in a renamed location so they would not be used unless
> you wanted to activate the copy as a replacement for the (probably
> now defunct) original.
Feel free to file an issue, or send a patch, etc. :)
In any case, neither issue is trivial to solve. They need some design.
E.g. there's no existing format for representing configuration files
or hook scripts in a dump file, let alone in the RA protocols (for the
svnsync case).
Received on 2010-09-28 17:56:22 CEST