You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Marc Sherman <ms...@projectile.ca> on 2006/04/11 21:17:40 UTC
Re: The nonxml-entries branch
Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
>
> Why keep the .svn/format file?
>
> A disappointing thing with nonxml-entries is that we keep .svn/format,
> at least for some minor svn releases. The reason for this is to let
> old clients give the user reasonably meaningful error messages when
> faced with a new working copy. It is better to say "your client is
> too old" than "This is not a working copy". We need to prefer
> usability to a small amount of disk space here.
What if, instead of moving the format number to the top of .svn/entries,
you got rid of the entries file and moved the pipe-separated entries
content to the bottom of the .svn/format file?
- Marc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: The nonxml-entries branch
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu>.
Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Marc Sherman]
>
>> What if, instead of moving the format number to the top of
>> .svn/entries, you got rid of the entries file and moved the
>> pipe-separated entries content to the bottom of the .svn/format file?
>>
>
> I'd hard-link the two filenames and fall back on writing a one-line
> 'format' file. Hard links, where available, are just a tiny bit more
> efficient than symlinks. That would require
>
> -AC_CHECK_FUNCS(symlink readlink)
> +AC_CHECK_FUNCS(symlink readlink link)
>
> in configure.in, and perhaps something a little fancier on win32 since
> hard links are only available on NTFS and possibly the API to create
> one is a little more involved than link(src, dest).
>
How often do hard links survive a "cp -R"?
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: The nonxml-entries branch
Posted by Peter Samuelson <pe...@p12n.org>.
[Marc Sherman]
> What if, instead of moving the format number to the top of
> .svn/entries, you got rid of the entries file and moved the
> pipe-separated entries content to the bottom of the .svn/format file?
I'd hard-link the two filenames and fall back on writing a one-line
'format' file. Hard links, where available, are just a tiny bit more
efficient than symlinks. That would require
-AC_CHECK_FUNCS(symlink readlink)
+AC_CHECK_FUNCS(symlink readlink link)
in configure.in, and perhaps something a little fancier on win32 since
hard links are only available on NTFS and possibly the API to create
one is a little more involved than link(src, dest).
Re: The nonxml-entries branch
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu>.
Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> Malcolm Rowe writes:
> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 05:17:40PM -0400, Marc Sherman wrote:
> > > Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> > > > Why keep the .svn/format file?
> > > >
> > > > A disappointing thing with nonxml-entries is that we keep .svn/format,
> > > What if, instead of moving the format number to the top of .svn/entries,
> > > you got rid of the entries file and moved the pipe-separated entries
> > > content to the bottom of the .svn/format file?
> > >
> >
> > +1. That sounds like a really sensible idea, unless I'm missing something.
> >
>
> Technically, I see no problems implementing this. It just seems a little funny
> to store entries in a file called format. But if people feel comfortable
> with this, it is OK with me.
>
Please *no*.
It's a lot saner to move the format number to the beginning of the
entries file.
The parser can look at the first few (e.g., 5) bytes in the entries file
to discriminate between different format versions:
* It it sees "<?xml", then it knows that's a working copy as we have
it now, and that it must look at the format file.
* If it sees, e.g., "# ver", then it's a new working copy without
the format file, and the version number determines if the contents
are XML or not.
So as a first step, I'd propose moving the format number to .svn/entries
and ignoring (but not removing!) .svn/format. The header in the entries
file might look like this:
# version: 33
<?xml charset="utf-8">
and .svn/format would contain the same format number. We could do this
for 1.4.
Then, at the next minor release, we could remove the format file, bump
the format number, and for all I care stop using XML in the .svn/entries
file.
But let's *not* rush WC format changes.
Or, to put this a bit more in prespective: if we do decide (vote) to
rush head-over-heels into changing the entries format and removing the
format file, those who vote in favour should be required to subscribe to
the users@ list and handle all the screams.
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: The nonxml-entries branch
Posted by "Peter N. Lundblad" <pe...@famlundblad.se>.
Malcolm Rowe writes:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 05:17:40PM -0400, Marc Sherman wrote:
> > Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> > > Why keep the .svn/format file?
> > >
> > > A disappointing thing with nonxml-entries is that we keep .svn/format,
> > What if, instead of moving the format number to the top of .svn/entries,
> > you got rid of the entries file and moved the pipe-separated entries
> > content to the bottom of the .svn/format file?
> >
>
> +1. That sounds like a really sensible idea, unless I'm missing something.
>
Technically, I see no problems implementing this. It just seems a little funny
to store entries in a file called format. But if people feel comfortable
with this, it is OK with me.
Thanks,
//Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: The nonxml-entries branch
Posted by Malcolm Rowe <ma...@farside.org.uk>.
On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 05:17:40PM -0400, Marc Sherman wrote:
> Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> > Why keep the .svn/format file?
> >
> > A disappointing thing with nonxml-entries is that we keep .svn/format,
> What if, instead of moving the format number to the top of .svn/entries,
> you got rid of the entries file and moved the pipe-separated entries
> content to the bottom of the .svn/format file?
>
+1. That sounds like a really sensible idea, unless I'm missing something.
Regards,
Malcolm
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org