[PATCH] A working copy is not called a 'repository'

Daniel Shahaf danielsh at elego.de
Wed Aug 7 03:14:24 CDT 2013

C. Michael Pilato wrote on Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 00:27:03 -0400:
> On 08/05/2013 04:20 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Daniel Shahaf wrote on Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 14:22:05 +0300:
> >> C. Michael Pilato wrote on Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 21:35:56 -0400:
> >>> On 07/02/2013 05:08 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >>>> C. Michael Pilato wrote on Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 13:59:34 -0400:
> >>>>> I like the idea here, but I think it's being introduced too early.  Chapter
> >>>>> 1 introduces concepts in a layered manner.  The first section is split into
> >>>>> two subsections, "Version Control Basics" and "Version Control the
> >>>>> Subversion Way".  I'd rather see your sidebar in the latter subsection, when
> >>>>> it's more "okay" to talk about Subversion specifically.  (But I'll grant
> >>>> Okay.  So how about moving the sidebar to the very end of
> >>>> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.basic.in-action.html#svn.basic.in-action.wc
> >>>> ?  Should I send a new patch?
> >>> Nah.  If you're okay with my moving it, I'll just add your sidebar in the
> >>> new location.
> >>>
> >> +1
> >>
> > Ping?
> Sorry, Daniel.  I got crazy busy just after we traded these mails and
> never got back to completing this task. In r4528, I reworked your
> sidebar as a <warning> and decided to put it in the section which
> introduces Subversion repositories.  After all, if someone is under the
> mistaken impression that the client-side thing is called a repository,
> it seems to me that would be topic they'd be more likely to research in
> the book first.

Sounds good, thanks.  But perhaps the warning box should link to the
section about working copies?  My intended use is to link people on IRC
and I'd like to lead them off that page as soon as possible (since it
constantly says things like "the repository must be accessed only by
Subversion's own tools", which would be confusing if they miss the
9-point sentence which explains the different terminology.)

So, ideas for improvement:

1. The link above should render the "Warning Box" with grey background,
like <http://subversion.apache.org/docs/release-notes/1.8#neon-deleted>
causes the "HTTP client support based on neon has been removed"
subsection to be highlit by a grey background.

2. The new warning box should link to

3. (minor) s/collection/directory/ in the warning box text.

Here's a patch implementing #2 and #3:

Index: ch01-fundamental-concepts.xml
--- ch01-fundamental-concepts.xml       (revision 4532)
+++ ch01-fundamental-concepts.xml       (working copy)
@@ -413,7 +413,7 @@
       <warning id="svn.basic.svn-repositories.not-working-copy">
         <para>In Subversion, the client-side object which every user
-          of the system has—the collection of versioned files,
+          of the system has—the directory of versioned files,
           along with metadata that enables the system to track them
           and communicate with the server—is called
           a <emphasis>working copy</emphasis>.  Although other version
@@ -421,6 +421,9 @@
           the client-side object, it is both incorrect and a common
           source of confusion to use the term in that way in the
           context of Subversion.</para>
+        <para>Working copies are described later, in
+          <xref linkend="svn.basic.in-action.wc"/>.</para>

As to #1, I would expect something like this (but I didn't test it):

Index: styles.css
--- styles.css  (revision 4532)
+++ styles.css  (working copy)
@@ -268,3 +268,11 @@ div.footnote {
     display: block;
+** Other Customizations
+body :target {
+  background-color: #e8e8e8;


More information about the svnbook-dev mailing list