If you wanted to say something about .svn, read this (Was Another Thought on .svn Size)

[Nuutti Kotivuori <na...@iki.fi>]

tbrowder@cox.net wrote:
> Perhaps another way to get the same functionality as now without the
> size is to use a lazy .svn:

> PS. I apologize if I've appeared to steal someone else's ideas.
> I've tried to read all posts on this thread but may have missed
> something.

I believe searching the issue tracker might prove fruitful. Or older
list archives. However, finding the articles might not be at all
trivial, so no blame for that.

Anyway, I will try to enumerate here the ideas and issues regarding
.svn that I recall:

 * .svn directory is too big
   - get rid of text-base (issue #525)
     - not have one at all
     - create text base on-demand
   - compress files (issue #908)
 * .svn directory contents
   - rename files to some hash name or similar
   - combine files to a single file or database
   - diddle read-onlyness (issue #1294)
 * .svn directory name or existence
   - allow customization of directory name
   - store directory somewhere else (issue #707)

I only spent a few moments gathering the issue numbers, but there are
several more there.

Perhaps I am overly pessimistic at the moment, but lately I have seen
very little new being said over those subjects.

-- Naked

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org