On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Laura Creighton <[email protected]> wrote: > In a message of Sat, 26 Feb 2011 10:25:45 +0100, Jacob Hallén writes: > > <snip> > >>While I am fine with dropping older revisions of just about everything in >>extradoc, I wonder if it wouldn't be better better for the future to keep >>this repository in svn format. That way you will only get one copy of >>everything when cloning the repository. >> >>Jacob > > I'm not fine with the dropping of older revisions. One of the chief > benefits for me of moving to a version control system was that I could > feel comfortable ruthlessly condensing my writing, knowing that if I > ever wanted this stuff later -- say to use in a different document, > I could always go back and get the old revision that contained the > wonderful words or diagrams I now propose to cut. And this has > happened in the past, where early versions of things I wrote ended > up raised out of the grave of the repository to live on as part of > completely different documents. > > I'm not going to be comfortable deleting stuff this if I think that > the grim reaper is out there, just waiting to purge all my earlier > attempts once some document is deemed to be 'final'. So I either > won't delete stuff, or I will go back to my old practice of having > dozens of versions around 'just in case'. > > I'm fine with continuing to have the extradoc managed by svn, though > I really want a script that runs nightly looking for things in > extradoc that have a mimetype of binary and complains about this. > > Laura >
Isn't the debate mostly about older revisions of binary files, since the rest is fine? Or you want to keep those as well? (say .doc) _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
