On 09/24/2012 12:23 PM, Philip Martin wrote: > Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> writes: > >> Is it just a bug in the test script, whereby it uses the just-compiled >> svn instead of /usr/bin/svn? >> >> C. Michael Pilato wrote on Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 11:32:03 -0400: >>> Aaaaand auto-upgrade strikes again. #hatethisnonfeature >>> >>> On 09/23/2012 08:33 PM, ne...@apache.org wrote: >>>> subversion/libsvn_wc/revision_status.c:64: (apr_err=155021) >>>> subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c:12198: (apr_err=155021) >>>> subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db_wcroot.c:609: (apr_err=155021) >>>> subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db_wcroot.c:266: (apr_err=155021) >>>> svn: E155021: This client is too old to work with the working copy at >>>> '/home/neels/pat/trunk/src' (format 30). >>>> You need to get a newer Subversion client. For more details, see >>>> http://subversion.apache.org/faq.html#working-copy-format-change >>> >>> [...] > > The code that locates the working copy root will upgrade an unrelated > working copy if it has to examine it. > > svn1.7 co URL wc1.7 > svn1.8 co URL wc/nested > > causes wc1.7 to be upgraded.
That's correct. And Philip, I see this as really two issues: 1. we auto-upgrade working copies (at all) 2. we auto-upgrade working copies that are arguably not the true targets of an operation. I can live with the first problem if I must. It's the second that's the more egregious of the two, in my book. So yes, I think it makes (as you suggested elsethread) to add a 'read-only' mode to the WCDB, and to use that mode in the initial exploratory phases of a checkout operation. Maybe we provide a way to upgrade that to read/write programmatically rather than closing and re-opening the DB ... no opinion there. Whatever makes the most sense. -- C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Enterprise Cloud Development
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
