On 07.03.2014 17:24, jrm wrote: > > On 03/06/2014 08:48 PM, Andy Levy wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 5:44 PM, jrm <j...@exa.com> wrote: >>> Working on some tools for a development environment that will make >>> use of >>> SVN. There are circumstances where I want to create temporary >>> information >>> of my own, related to checked out versions. Rather than cluttering >>> up the >>> working directory with other special directories and files, I was >>> wondering >>> how safe it might be to make direct use of the ".svn" directory for >>> my own >>> purposes? >>> >>> Aside from the existing purposed subdirectories - would it be safe >>> to create >>> files in either "tmp", ".svn" proper, or a new subdirectory under >>> ".svn"? >> Do not do anything in the .svn directory. That directory is >> exclusively for the use of the SVN working copy library and you could >> easily break your WC. > > Sure - if I overwrote something that has a genuine purpose - or created > something in a location where SVN expects exactly certain files to be. > But is SVN so fragile that it can't tolerate a differently named > subdirectory > or file under there? > > Or has experience taught you to treat SVN as fragile?
It's not a question of SVN being fragile or not. The .svn/ directory is private to Subversion and you're not allowed to fiddle with it. We've been saying this loudly over and over again for 10+ years. Of course, every now and then someone comes along and says, "sure, but that doesn't apply to /me/". The result are tools that break with the next Subversion upgrade, or that break Subversion when it's upgraded. No-one can stop you from messing with .svn/, but if you do, please don't report here when something breaks. -- Brane -- Branko Čibej | Director of Subversion WANdisco // Non-Stop Data e. br...@wandisco.com
