Re: AW: copying subdirectories in subversion 1.7

2011-07-25 Thread Les Mikesell

On 7/25/11 7:49 AM, Markus Schaber wrote:


Von: Les Mikesell [mailto:lesmikes...@gmail.com]

On 7/25/11 3:22 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:

I am not aware of any existing developer who expressed interest in
working on 'svn detach'.


Just curious: what drove the original WC design where each

subdirectory

was inherently independent?  And is this the same set of developers?


My guess is that this Design was inherited from CVS.

And AFAICS, the initial set of developers had some common members with
the CVS developers, and it changed gradually, there was no revolution
replacing all existing developers with new ones.


The tradeoffs are sort of obvious, but it seems like a very drastic change to 
make with no option to maintain the old behavior.


--
  Les Mikesell
   lesmikes...@gmail.com


Re: AW: copying subdirectories in subversion 1.7

2011-07-25 Thread Mark Phippard
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 7/25/11 7:49 AM, Markus Schaber wrote:


 Von: Les Mikesell [mailto:lesmikes...@gmail.com]

 On 7/25/11 3:22 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:

 I am not aware of any existing developer who expressed interest in
 working on 'svn detach'.


 Just curious: what drove the original WC design where each

 subdirectory

 was inherently independent?  And is this the same set of developers?


 My guess is that this Design was inherited from CVS.

 And AFAICS, the initial set of developers had some common members with
 the CVS developers, and it changed gradually, there was no revolution
 replacing all existing developers with new ones.


 The tradeoffs are sort of obvious, but it seems like a very drastic change
 to make with no option to maintain the old behavior.


In SVN 1.6 and earlier it is not like someone wrote code specifically to
allow people to copy/move folders out of their WC.  It was just something
that fell out of the design.  There are plenty of instances where people did
not want this behavior, and for them it is now fixed.  For example, in
Eclipse this has always been a huge problem.  Users would copy and paste a
folder and this would silently bring the .svn folder with it which was not
what was desired.  I mention Eclipse simply because this is one of the only
events where it does not provide a hook for plugins to get involved so the
SVN plugins for Eclipse are not able to detect and fix this situation and it
is perceived as a bug.

The opinion was that if users really want to be able to easily detach
folders from their working copy someone will step up with scripts and/or
patches to add a feature to SVN to do it.

-- 
Thanks

Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/


Re: AW: copying subdirectories in subversion 1.7

2011-07-25 Thread Les Mikesell

On 7/25/2011 9:24 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:



Von: Les Mikesell [mailto:lesmikes...@gmail.com
mailto:lesmikes...@gmail.com]

On 7/25/11 3:22 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:

I am not aware of any existing developer who expressed
interest in
working on 'svn detach'.


Just curious: what drove the original WC design where each

subdirectory

was inherently independent?  And is this the same set of
developers?


My guess is that this Design was inherited from CVS.

And AFAICS, the initial set of developers had some common
members with
the CVS developers, and it changed gradually, there was no
revolution
replacing all existing developers with new ones.


The tradeoffs are sort of obvious, but it seems like a very drastic
change to make with no option to maintain the old behavior.


In SVN 1.6 and earlier it is not like someone wrote code specifically to
allow people to copy/move folders out of their WC.  It was just
something that fell out of the design.


Agreed, but it is a logical design that falls out of the way 
subdirectories work and the way people use them.



There are plenty of instances
where people did not want this behavior, and for them it is now fixed.


Agreed again.  Although the change I would have preferred would have 
been an option to not keep a pristine copy at all for the circumstances 
where it doesn't work out well.



For example, in Eclipse this has always been a huge problem.  Users
would copy and paste a folder and this would silently bring the .svn
folder with it which was not what was desired.  I mention Eclipse simply
because this is one of the only events where it does not provide a hook
for plugins to get involved so the SVN plugins for Eclipse are not able
to detect and fix this situation and it is perceived as a bug.

The opinion was that if users really want to be able to easily detach
folders from their working copy someone will step up with scripts and/or
patches to add a feature to SVN to do it.


I'm not arguing that the change is bad or shouldn't have been done, just 
that it is a very surprising change in design philosophy, and projects 
that make surprising design changes without concern for existing use 
patterns make me nervous about what other surprises may be lurking in them.


--
  Les Mikesell
   lesmikes...@gmail.com


Re: AW: copying subdirectories in subversion 1.7

2011-07-25 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 09:49:13AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
 I'm not arguing that the change is bad or shouldn't have been done,
 just that it is a very surprising change in design philosophy, and
 projects that make surprising design changes without concern for
 existing use patterns

And the fact that we carefully considered this case, discussed it, and
came to a conclusion, does not comfort you? That we documented known
workarounds for this uses case even though it has never been officially
supported? It's not like we are being secretive about it or didn't
care about users who use this feature.

 make me nervous about what other surprises may be lurking in them.

Any other surprises we know about are documented in the release notes.
If there are additional ones we don't know about them and they will
hopefully be found during beta testing. If you find one, let us know :)


Re: AW: copying subdirectories in subversion 1.7

2011-07-25 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:13:43AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
 On 7/25/2011 9:58 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
 You agree but you are also missing or glossing over my point.  When you
 copied that subdirectory you were not using a feature of SVN, you used
 the OS.  SVN cannot provide an option on the OS copy command.
 
 And you seem to have missed the point that people understand and use
 OS level commands and expect them to work.  I'm sure I didn't invent
 the idea of doing that, so it has almost certainly been promoted as
 an advantage of the design on this list and in usage tutorials if
 not in official documentation.

As I've already mentioned, to the best of my knowledge, copying subdirs
to create new working copies was never recommended in official documentation.
 
 Given how closely you follow the project, I am surprised you are
 surprised.
 
 I'm not surprised that the capability is not there in the
 new/different WC format.  I'm surprised that there is no option to
 maintain currently-expected behavior in a release version.

It is wrong to expect it. It doesn't even work properly in 1.6 in
some cases (you cannot copy a locally added tree without its parent
and expect it to work as an independent working copy -- not that
such an operation would make sense).

 This release has taken over 2 years and the new WC design
 has not changed from the original proposal.  If you go back to the lists
 you will see the ramifications of this change were being discussed even
 while we were still working on SVN 1.6 and the need for an svn detach
 was raised back then.
 
 Which makes it even more surprising that it was omitted.

You cannot omit something which doesn't exist yet.

The 'svn detach' subcommand has not been added because there was no time
left to implement it in the 1.7.x release cycle. There are enough
improvements in 1.7.x that make the upgrade worthwhile regardless.


Re: AW: copying subdirectories in subversion 1.7

2011-07-25 Thread Daniel Shahaf
I think you've made your point by now.  However, 1.7 is close enough to
being released that this feature will NOT be included in it.  How do you
suggest to proceed?

Personally, I'd suggest documenting this in the 1.7 release notes and
contributing the hands to work on this for 1.8.

Les Mikesell wrote on Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:13:43 -0500:
 I'm surprised