Bert Huijben wrote on Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 22:33:09 +0100: > I don't say that we should stop reading fsfs.conf, but why should we > introduce a 'fs.conf' at the repos level for things that don't belong > at that level and most likely 99% of our users will never use? >
fs.conf will be going away. My current plan (given consensus on this thread) is to go for the FSFS-specific implementation, controlled by an svn_fs_t.fs_config knob. And implement 'svnadmin verify -t', I have a half-written patch for this lying around. > fsfs contains things like sharding information which are essential for > functionality. It is not a diagnostics configuration file. That's in the format file, not in fsfs.conf
