> Right - using svn programs to directly modify the svk depot (which is it's
> local 'repository'), is touchy. You *can* do it, but you have to be quite
> careful about the svk:* properties used to track merges and mirrors.
> Generally there's no need, other than perhaps using a read-only client t
Daniel Berlin wrote:
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 12:08 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 12:00:26PM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
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
Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
>> >
>> > You can't mix svn and svk commits against the same repo. It confuses
>> > svk (not svn).
>> >
>> > You can use svk readonly, of course.
>>
>> Actually, that's not quite right. While svk's depot must only be used by
>> svk, the usual usage is to mirror a regular s
> >
> > You can't mix svn and svk commits against the same repo. It confuses svk
> > (not svn).
> >
> > You can use svk readonly, of course.
>
> Actually, that's not quite right. While svk's depot must only be used by
> svk, the usual usage is to mirror a regular subversion repository with
> svk
Daniel Berlin wrote:
You can't mix svn and svk commits against the same repo. It confuses svk
(not svn).
You can use svk readonly, of course.
Actually, that's not quite right. While svk's depot must only be used by
svk, the usual usage is to mirror a regular subversion repository with
svk into a sv
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 12:08 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 12:00:26PM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > >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
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 17:24 +, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 17:11, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
>
> > Moreover, I often want just a quick look at the source, and a checkout
> > has quite
> > a long latency for that.
>
> It ought to be less bad for SVN than CVS, particularly for o
Richard Earnshaw wrote:
Huh? Why would I want to copy the binaries?
Sorry, I must have mis-understood. I thought you wanted to keep
binaries of builds around so that you could work out quickly *when* a
regression had been introduced, even if you hadn't tested a particular
combination
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 17:11, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
> Moreover, I often want just a quick look at the source, and a checkout
> has quite
> a long latency for that.
It ought to be less bad for SVN than CVS, particularly for older code,
and branches. Though I agree it's not going to be zero.
> An
Richard Earnshaw wrote:
Why do you need to keep the source around at all (unless you are
actively working on that version)? All you need is the single revision
number string and you can guarantee to get exactly that source code back
at any time you want, should you need it.
Only while the
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 12:00:26PM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > >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 stuc
>
>
> >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.
> >
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 16:35, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
> Actually, having one copy of the entire repository might be cheaper than
> having
> several dozen double checkouts. But then, having no firm, easily memorized
> revision numbers is certainly a much larger issue. I understand that
> distribut
Daniel Berlin wrote:
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?
No, I don't think it is a show stopper, but it is a drawback.
The plan is to have the re
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 15:29 +, 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 am
15 matches
Mail list logo
