You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu> on 2002/09/04 19:35:13 UTC
Re: Long-lived transactions
Greg Hudson wrote:
>The downside of long-lived transactions is that they feel a lot like
>branches, and having two ways of doing the same thing is poor. (We
>would start to get calls to be able to stick working directories to
>named transactions, to be able to merge into a transaction, stuff like
>that.) But it would mean being able to manipulate a repository without
>either creating a new revision or being chained to the performance
>characteristics of a working directory.
>
>
But on the other hand, these long-lived transactions you proposed behave
exactly like locks on HEAD should behave! With locks, your example:
> repos=http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn
> cl=$repos/trunk/clients
> svn mktrans $repos reorg
> svn mv -t reorg $cl/cmdline $cl/cmdline.old
> svn mv -t reorg $cl/cmdline.new $cl/cmdline
> svn citrans $repos reorg
>
would become:
cl=http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/clients
svn lock $cl -m 'Reorganizing the clients directory'
svn mv $cl/cmdline $cl/cmdline.old
svn mv $cl/cmdline.new $cl/cmdline
svn ci $cl
--
Brane Čibej <br...@xbc.nu> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Long-lived transactions
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu>.
Peter Davis wrote:
>On Wednesday 04 September 2002 12:35, Branko Čibej wrote:
>
>
>>But on the other hand, these long-lived transactions you proposed behave
>>exactly like locks on HEAD should behave!
>>
>>
>
>Not quite, I think he was inventing a way to do a bunch of "svn {rm,mv,cp}
>URL" in a single commit. Well, I guess you're showing the same thing with
>locks, but I wasn't aware that changes to a locked URL directory (not wc)
>would all belong to the same transaction/commit. Was that part of the
>locking idea?
>
I think locks should behave like that, yes.
--
Brane Čibej <br...@xbc.nu> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Long-lived transactions
Posted by Peter Davis <pe...@pdavis.cx>.
On Wednesday 04 September 2002 12:35, Branko Čibej wrote:
> But on the other hand, these long-lived transactions you proposed behave
> exactly like locks on HEAD should behave!
Not quite, I think he was inventing a way to do a bunch of "svn {rm,mv,cp}
URL" in a single commit. Well, I guess you're showing the same thing with
locks, but I wasn't aware that changes to a locked URL directory (not wc)
would all belong to the same transaction/commit. Was that part of the
locking idea?
--
Peter Davis
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org