[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: unversioned properties: size limitations?

From: Alexey Neyman <stilor_at_att.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:09 -0700

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 09:43:39 AM Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 12.08.2014 09:26, Alexey Neyman wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 08:33:06 AM Branko Čibej wrote:
> > > So why do you need the last-changed revision of the project directory
> > > stored in the header file? Are you distributing sources directly from
> > > the repository, or are you using that number to identify builds? In
> > > either case, there are better ways to do that.
> >
> > Sometimes, yes. Not directly from a repository but engineers sometimes
> > release semi-official builds to customers.
> >
> > I understand that is less than ideal way (not dealing with
> > mixed-revision WCs, etc.). So, I am curious what are those better ways
> > you mention?
> I'm sort of assuming a defined build (or packaging) workflow. If you
> have engineers mailing binaries from their mixed-revision development
> working copies to customers, all bets are off, since they might have
> locally modified your version property.
> One solution is to run "svnversion" as part of the package/build and
> include the result in the build artefacts. Can't go into any more detail
> than that, since I have no ides what your build system looks like. This
> won't always perfectly identify the configuration you're building, but
> at least it will give some indication of the state of the working copy,
> and whether (oh horror) it includes local modifications.

1. svnversion reports the revision of the check-out, not the revision of the last

2. svnversion does not provide the $Date$ information.

3. svnversion won't report anything on 'svn export'-ed sources.

All that would be handled if there were a way to modify a transaction being committed :)

> > - Second, some of the MIME types are text even though the MIME type
> > does not start with 'text/*'. "image/svg", "application/x-sh" and
> > "application/xml" are a few most obvious examples that come to mind. I
> > don't know how to come up with an exhaustive list of such
> > "text-despite-MIME-type" types.
> Heh, tell me about it. Subversion has the same problem, and we still
> haven't found a satisfactory solution for it.

Well, if Subversion set an svn:binary to true/false just to report the heuristics, in addition to
svn:mime-type, that would've helped somewhat. But Subversion heuristics only runs on
newly added files.

> So you really only have to add this property on added files, right? Have
> you considered using auto-props? They don't currently give you exactly
> the knob you need, because we don't have an auto-prop setting for "all
> binary" or "all text" files, but maybe that could solve your problem.

No, it is also set on existing files as they're modified.

> Especially now that, with 1.8, you can define auto-prop settings in the
> repository and no longer need local configuration on every client.
> (Caveat: you do need 1.8 clients.)

Now you tell me about that. I am still trying to weed out 1.6 clients (which break horribly by
nested 'svn mv')- since CentOS does not update the base version of the packages during
the release lifetime, CentOS 6.x is stuck with Subversion 1.6.

Thanks to WanDisco for providing the CentOS RPMs for Subversion 1.7/1.8 :)

It would be nice if there were a 'start-access' script that is run on any access to the
repository - that can be used to block such older clients from even accessing the

Speaking of 'wish' items:

- How hard would be to implement client-side hooks? I know TortoiseSVN has them, but
they're local - and to be really useful, they need to be propagated from the repository.
And it would be nice to have them supported by the default commandline client. If they
were supported, the tasks like the ones described above could be relegated to the client
side, and the server-side hooks could then just reject the commit if the client failed to run
the script.

- How hard would be to allow modifications to a transaction by pre-commit? If it is just the
issue of client-side caches going stale - can a "shadow transaction" be created that
records all the modifications by the pre-commit script and then sends it back to the client
to apply to the WC?

Received on 2014-08-12 18:09:37 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.