On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name>wrote:
> [ fixed leading "> " signs ] > > Hyrum K. Wright wrote on Thu, 27 May 2010 at 16:17 -0500: > > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Bob Archer <bob.arc...@amsi.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Will per-directory .svn's remain as an option in 1.7+? (I thought > > > > > yes...) > > > > > > > > Not to my knowledge. I wasn't aware of the use case (aside from > > > > severable working copies) that engendered this need. > > > > > > > > > > How are the 1.7 WC libraries going to determine if a folder is part of > a > > > WC? Are they going to have to walk the file system backwards all the > way to > > > the root? That seems like a bit of a perf hit for large projects with a > deep > > > level of nested folders? > > > > > > > "deeply nested" usually means only 10-15 folders. Recursing up to find > the > > root of the working copy is a one-time operation during the course of an > > invocation of 'svn' on that working copy. As such, it's essentially a > free > > operation. > > > > How would recursing interact with symlinks into working copy dirs? > (I know we it have been discussed before; a pointer would be appreciated) > > eg: > > svn co $SVN_TRUNK trunk > ln -s trunk/notes notes > cd notes > svn st > Isn't this just a subset of the "severable working copy" use case? -Hyrum
