David Weintraub <qazwart@gmail.com> writes:
> On 7/13/05, Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@collab.net> wrote:
> > Has anyone noticed how the new-feature floodgates have opened? :-)
>
> Actually, the only feature I believe Subversion really needs, and was
> discussed in the original technical notes but never implemented, is
> the ability to track what revisions were already merged.
>
> As far as I can tell, almost everything else is icing on the cake, but
> merge tracking is something that is needed if you're going to include
> Subversion in more complex projects.
>
> I know tha SVK does it, and I know a few people who use SVK only for
> its merge tracking ability. Where does that feature stand in
> Subversion itself.
That feature (which is one subfeature of a broader feature known as
"merge tracking", see notes/merge-tracking.txt) is certainly *very*
attractive, but it's not the only feature Subversion needs. In any
case, a number of us consider correcting the rename situation to be a
dependency for merge tracking. That is, without real renames, merge
tracking is more difficult to implement.
By the way, the reason it wasn't implemented as described in the
original technical notes is that we quickly discovered we hadn't
thought deeply enough about the problem. The methods described there
don't really work, although some of them may be used as part of the
solution.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jul 14 00:45:49 2005