Greg Hudson wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-03-26 at 22:15, Kevin Puetz wrote:
>> Or perhaps the even less ambigous "svn revision", "revnum", or something
>> like that.
>
> I don't think this should get an svn subcommand. We need to keep our
> command set small in order to keep our learning curve shallow, and
> having a lot of neat utilities stashed inside the svn command isn't
> consistent with that goal.
>
> Maybe we could shoehorn this function into "svn info", but I don't know
> if that can be done cleanly.
>
> (I realize that shipping a lot of separate commands in order to get the
> neat utilities isn't great either. Probably we shouldn't have shipped
> svnversion farther than the contrib directory.)
Oh no, it's definitely more useful than that.
If we were designing it now, I think we would unquestionably make it a svn
subcommand, but I don't see any point in changing it now.
Max.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Mar 27 13:16:44 2005