On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 08:36:42AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Daniel Shahaf <danielsh_at_elego.de> wrote:
> >> It would have been nice if --incremental would automatically upgrade the
> >> target repository (and fallback to a full backup) if the versions
> >> mismatch.
> > Hmm. Interesting idea, but replacing failure modes with automagical
> > behaviour is generally looked at with skepticism (is this error _really_
> > always safe to not tell the admin about?). For the sake of argument,
> > why shouldn't admins who want this behaviour opt-in to it by having
> > their scripts do
> > svnadmin upgrade $dest
> > svnadmin hotcopy --incremental $src $dest
> > ? (Note that 'upgrade' is idempotent, and will exit without error for
> > already-most-recent-format repositories.)
The current implementation is conservative on purpose. If there is
huge demand I'll consider the idea of making incremental hotcopy deal
with upgraded repositories in some automated way. Perhaps there is
a good way of doing this. Perhaps not.
For now, users who copy data between repositories of different formats
should consider using 'svnadmin dump --incremental /svnadmin load'
instead of hotcopy.
> Which case is worse for an unattended script? Leaving you with no
> backups or one that needs a newer program to be able to use? And
> which case might an early user of subversion have been trained to
Early users of Subversion don't have scripts that use incremental
hotcopy anyway. And if people don't notice that their backup scripts
are failing for some reason (I know this happens, I've seen it happen
many times), then they've got bigger problems which we cannot solve
Received on 2013-08-12 16:02:27 CEST