On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Ivan Zhakov <i...@visualsvn.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 01:50:36PM -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote: >>> That's correct. >>> >>> And Philip, I see this as really two issues: >>> >>> 1. we auto-upgrade working copies (at all) >>> 2. we auto-upgrade working copies that are arguably not the true targets of >>> an operation. >>> >>> I can live with the first problem if I must. It's the second that's the >>> more egregious of the two, in my book. So yes, I think it makes (as you >>> suggested elsethread) to add a 'read-only' mode to the WCDB, and to use that >>> mode in the initial exploratory phases of a checkout operation. Maybe we >>> provide a way to upgrade that to read/write programmatically rather than >>> closing and re-opening the DB ... no opinion there. Whatever makes the most >>> sense. >> >> Or we just disable auto-upgrade. I think we've seen enough reasons >> now why it's just a plain stupid idea in practice. >> > +1 to disable auto-upgrade. WC upgrade is non reversible operation and > performing it silently is very bad idea.
Yet again I give my hearty +1 (and wonder why this is still even a question several months after first discussing the issue. :/ ) -Hyrum
