On Wednesday 17 June 2009 09:28:36 Oliver Schneider wrote: > > > I do not see how this solves the metadata issue if you use a version > > > control system directly without the smartness etckeeper brings to the > > > table e.g. by using its .gitignore settings. > > > > > > svk is an attempt to inject the notion of being a decentralized scm > > > into a centralized one (which svn happens to be) ... that has nothing > > > to do with putting /etc under version control > > > > metadata = data stored in .svn/ ? > > Yes. In this case all the metadata stored by SVN. > > Certainly there is more metadata which is nowadays simply ignored by many > VCS, partially due to the discrepancies between different platforms and > there implementation of, say, file permissions, partially out of negligence > or lack of a *proper* solution. > I considered that svn used the *proper* solution with it properties system. Using subversion properties allows you to store arbitrary metadata on a per file/directory basis. This allows each svn client to handle that metadata in the most appropriate way, without having the application try to decide this for you (It does make some assumptions for you, such as svn:executable, which doesn't make sense on windows platforms, but is necessary for unixy systems. I solved most of these problems a few years ago by making a program, etcsvn, to handle this stuff for me. After using it for around a year or so, with many machines, I found that it was less hassle to keep from placing the complete /etc directory in subversion, and just track certain files (i.e. those that were changed or new). > Also, as far as I understand SVK it's using only one Subversion library, > not the whole thing. It's not just a distributed SVN in that sense ... also > see: <http://svk.bestpractical.com/view/SVKAntiFUD> > > // Oliver -- Thanks: Joseph Rawson
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.