> On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 10:13:11AM -0400, Andy Levy wrote: > > On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 10:06 AM, 徐鸿 <iceh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi all > > > > > > does svn1.7 support one 'Centralized Metadata Storage' across > > > diffent working copies ? > > > I have read the wc-ng design notes and found its talking about > > > storing metadata according to the user's config, but I search a lot > > > and found nothing about it , is it an developing feature ? > > > > > > I am working at a huge project managed by svn and usually keeping > > > diffent branches of code the same time, I think if I can use one > > > metadata it will save a lot of disk space, is it ture ? > > > > > > any reply is appreciate, thanks > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------- > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/notes/wc-ng/design > > > According to the user's config, the metadata will be placed in one > > > of three areas: > > > > > > wcroot: at the root of the working copy in a .svn subdirectory > > > home: in the .subversion/wc/ subdirectory > > > /some/path: stored in the given path > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > > > AFAIK, the current WC library can only store metadata at the root of the > WC. > > > > Keep in mind you're reading notes on a design discussion, not > > necessarily the *actual* design. Those notes were last updated over 2 > > years ago, about 18 months before SVN 1.7's release - so there's > > probably quite a bit of outdated information in there. > > Sharing working copy meta-data between multiple working copies is planned > for a future release. For 1.7 the goal was to create a new working copy > library > that supports all features supported by 1.6, and which allows additional > features to be added in later releases.
It sounds like what he is asking for more than a "shared working copy metadata" is sharing the pristine. For example, if I have a file that is in 10 branches and they all have the same pristine it will use that one pristine rather than a pristine for each copy in each branch. Perhaps that is what you mean when you say "shared meta-data" but that wasn't my understanding of this. Frankly, for me, working copy disk usage is the least of my concerns. BOb
