On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 15:29 +0000, Joern RENNECKE wrote: > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > > > > > >>Because svn keeps an extra pristine copy for checkouts, I'll have to use > >>svn export for > >>automatic regression tests. > >> > >> > > > >I don't understand why. > >Is this because of the amount of space the working copy takes up? > > > > > > Yes. Sometimes stuff breaks and you don't notice it right away (E.g. > because the > feature is not automatically tested, or because of noise from other test > failures). > So it is useful to keep several month worth of test builds around. > Doubling the > amount of space taken up by this is not acceptable.
Then you are correct, the only way to do what you want is export, or cp excluding the .svn directories. Do you consider this a show stopper, or are you willing to export your trees? Because if it's a show stopper, then so will be arch, monotone, or any of our other replacements (they all either store the entire repo on your disk, or have stuff in the working copy), and we will be stuck with cvs until everyone is happy to use up double/whatever disk. Again guys, i'm not trying to force anything on anyone. If we don't want to move, we don't *have* to move. I just have a hard time seeing us using cvs for another 5-10 years, and i have a hard time seeing what is going to miraculously change about our repository between then and now. The only thing i see changing is maybe things like svn grow the ability to compress their working copies (already been suggested and i believe someone is working on it), or whatever. I highly doubt the basic fact that the checkouts take more space will change, even if the constant changes from 2.5 to 1.5. So if the fact that checkouts are larger is a showstopper for people, (IE they aren't willing to adjust), we might as well quit evaluating now :)
