[nycbug-talk] svnup(1) - worthy of promotion to base?

George Rosamond george at ceetonetechnology.com
Mon Mar 11 21:02:45 EDT 2013

On 03/11/13 15:42, Isaac (.ike) Levy wrote:
> On Mar 11, 2013, at 3:06 PM, Pete Wright wrote:
>> On 03/11/13 08:31, Fabian Keil wrote:
>>> Isaac (.ike) Levy <ike at blackskyresearch.net> wrote:
>>>> --
>>>> My observations so far:
>>>> svnup(1) speed "feel"
>>>> Without opening up any cans of worms on SCM tools, I believe the 'git effect' creates some unrealistic expectations for the utility.  (Git's impact is so huge on development, it's become so popular, it affects/warps perception of other tools.)  git(1) has spectacular indexing/hashing, it's implementation is really thoughtful compared to svn(1).  So, remote fetching of deltas, on massive codebases, is extremely fast.
>>> But actually checking out the fetched deltas scales with
>>> the repository size.
>> i can attest to this unfortunately - been struggling with a poorly thought out production system where we use git to replicate data to all our POPs.  lets just say when re-calculating your repo's hashes takes close to an hour you've made some terrible decisions :)

Jumping back into svnup(1)... quick and undigested observation.

So ran it on a few boxes for the past few days, but found a nasty quirk
on... a laptop.

Libreoffice died during building previously, leaving its enormous work/
full of, well, work.

svnup of course wants to clean this up.

So not so great with preexisting messes?

Hmmm.  make clean now a prerequisite?


More information about the talk mailing list