On 07.03.2014 17:24, jrm wrote:
>
> On 03/06/2014 08:48 PM, Andy Levy wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 5:44 PM, jrm <jrm_at_exa.com> wrote:
>>> Working on some tools for a development environment that will make
>>> use of
>>> SVN. There are circumstances where I want to create temporary
>>> information
>>> of my own, related to checked out versions. Rather than cluttering
>>> up the
>>> working directory with other special directories and files, I was
>>> wondering
>>> how safe it might be to make direct use of the ".svn" directory for
>>> my own
>>> purposes?
>>>
>>> Aside from the existing purposed subdirectories - would it be safe
>>> to create
>>> files in either "tmp", ".svn" proper, or a new subdirectory under
>>> ".svn"?
>> Do not do anything in the .svn directory. That directory is
>> exclusively for the use of the SVN working copy library and you could
>> easily break your WC.
>
> Sure - if I overwrote something that has a genuine purpose - or created
> something in a location where SVN expects exactly certain files to be.
> But is SVN so fragile that it can't tolerate a differently named
> subdirectory
> or file under there?
>
> Or has experience taught you to treat SVN as fragile?
It's not a question of SVN being fragile or not. The .svn/ directory is
private to Subversion and you're not allowed to fiddle with it. We've
been saying this loudly over and over again for 10+ years. Of course,
every now and then someone comes along and says, "sure, but that doesn't
apply to /me/". The result are tools that break with the next Subversion
upgrade, or that break Subversion when it's upgraded.
No-one can stop you from messing with .svn/, but if you do, please don't
report here when something breaks.
-- Brane
--
Branko Čibej | Director of Subversion
WANdisco // Non-Stop Data
e. brane_at_wandisco.com
Received on 2014-03-07 17:34:44 CET