subversion-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bob Archer <>
Subject RE: Parallel branches/tags/trunk directories
Date Thu, 11 Aug 2011 19:23:06 GMT
> > Not "sufficient" because it takes time and manual work to do? Or, because
> it doesn't do what you need?
> Taking 97 minutes to pull 25 GB from all the tags/ and branches/ is
> unacceptable when it takes only 3 minutes to pull the 660 MB we actually
> need from just the trunk/ directories.  Getting everything and then manually
> pruning isn't a viable option.  Getting just the trunk/ directories without a
> brittle script is the whole point of my post.
> > Sparse directories is exactly what you need to use to get what you want.
> > 1.7 added a -parents (I think it is) argument to the update/checkout
> > [...]
> I'll check out that option.  Unfortunately...
> > What version of the server are you running? I think if you use Sparse
> > directories with a pre 1.6 server the server sends all the files and the client
> just throws away what doesn't fit into your requested depth.
> Ah.  Our server reports itself as 1.4.2.  That probably explains why it took so
> long.  I have no idea what the odds are of having our server upgraded (used
> by many other projects).
> > That all said, I don't really see the benefit of having one working copy that
> you can update at once.
> As opposed to having 14 working copies that every developer has
> to manually maintain?  Really?  The layout in my OP is only part of this
> project.  We really do have 14 separate branches/tags/trunks trees.  This is a
> new project, so that number will probably go up over time.

Yes really. I have perhaps 20 or more working copies checked out. Many of those are various
versions (branches) of one project. I update the ones I am working on as needed. I have no
need to update WC's that I'm not working on every time I update the stuff I am working on.
Once again, I don't see the benefit. 


> > I prefer to check out the branch and/or trunks that I need to work on
> > as needed and update each one as needed. If you want to update all
> > your working copies with one command you can create a local batch file
> which goes through and calls update on each folder.
> With --max-depth it should be possible to avoid needing a script for
> updates.  I've been working on a script for the initial checkout. It's non-trivial
> and brittle.  I will postpone the gory details unless there is interest.

View raw message