Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> writes:
> OK.
>
> What about a note that says that upgrade *might* be slower than checkout?
>
> Index: subversion/svn/main.c
> ===================================================================
> --- subversion/svn/main.c (revision 1140083)
> +++ subversion/svn/main.c (working copy)
> @@ -1385,7 +1385,7 @@ const svn_opt_subcommand_desc2_t svn_cl__cmd_table
> " Local modifications are preserved.\n"
> "\n"
> " Note: Upgrading a working copy from the format used in Subversion
> 1.6\n"
> - " to the format used in Subversion 1.7 takes much more time than
> checking\n"
> + " to the format used in Subversion 1.7 might take more time than
> checking\n"
> " out a new working copy with the 1.7 client.\n"),
> { 'q' } },
It's difficult to get the wording right because we don't know enough
about the relative performance. Should we be indicating any preference
for one over the other? Using "might" can be interpreted as upgrade
being preferred and that there is a small chance that it will be slow.
For all we know upgrade is usually slower and there is only a small
chance that it is faster.
If we know nothing about a working copy, apart from it being unmodified,
and nothing about the local machine, the server or the network, do we
recommend upgrade or checkout? I don't know.
--
Philip
