On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:08:53AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > On 9/28/2010 9:49 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > >On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 04:42:50PM +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > >>Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote on Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 23:05:20 -0400: > >>>dump is very useful for using a new format, or optimizing the relevant > >>>database. It doesn't bring along your config tools. In fact, I'd love > >>>to see the "svnadmin hotcopy" factored, first to transfer the > >>>database, and separately to transfer configurations. > >> > >>i.e., to copy the hooks/ and conf/ directories too? Sounds like > >>a reasonable feature request... > >> > >>Feel free to file an issue, or send a patch, etc. > > > >Such an issue already exists: > >http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3299 > > It would be nice if svnsync tracked and transported them as well, > but kept them in a renamed location so they would not be used unless > you wanted to activate the copy as a replacement for the (probably > now defunct) original.
Feel free to file an issue, or send a patch, etc. :) In any case, neither issue is trivial to solve. They need some design. E.g. there's no existing format for representing configuration files or hook scripts in a dump file, let alone in the RA protocols (for the svnsync case).
