On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote: > Geoff Field wrote on Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:14:41 +1000: >> The files are stored in original format in your working copy under >> ./.svn/pristine/*, but with hashed names. >> > > That's an implementation detail. > >> On the server, they're stored under ./db/revs as a series of deltas. >> If you look at ./db/revs/0 with a text editor, for example, you'll see > > That's *extremely* dangerous advice. If you open one of those files in > a text editor, you run an extremely high risk of corrupting your > repository, quite possibly creating a latent corruption that will only > manifest months or years later.
Use a pager, such as 'less'. > Don't ever edit those files. If you're curious, use a sandbox, or an > svnsync mirror, and play with that. > >> If you're only storing text files, there's half a chance of >> understanding what's stored in the delta files. I wouldn't even >> consider editing them, though. > > Don't bother trying. It's not possible to edit a revision file without > corrupting the repository. > >> There is probably a setting somewhere to allow a "shadow" version to >> be set up somewhere - if not, it would be a nice idea. I know in >> SourceSafe, I was able to set up "shadow" folders on a server so that >> changes were automatically updated. I suspect that SubVersion would >> require a server-side post-commit hook to be written to do the same >> job. Does anybody have one they could share? > > svnwcsub, documented in the FAQ. > >> > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > P.S. Geoff: don't let the above discourage you from understanding how > svn works behind the scenes. The only thing I ask is that you don't > give people advice that effectively teaches them how to corrupt their > repositories....
