On Sun, 13 Nov 2005, Christian Stork wrote:
> > > The ability to have branches that cover only a subset of the project;
>
> > Jim's suggested a way to expand the proposal to cover this; the value of
> > the treeroot property is the subpath that's branched. For trees
> > branched from the root, it's empty.
>
> I have to say that Jim's suggestion does not seem to overly complicate
> things, in fact it seems like a clean generalization of your proposal.
> And since it does cover some significant uses of branches it seems worth
> it.
Yes, it looks good to me too.
> > > The ability to map from short nicknames to longer branch names (e.g.
> > > a rewrite rule could map from "B#foo" to "branches/gcc-foo-branch",
> > > while the projectroot+treeroot proposal would require the user to
> > > specify '+branches/gcc-foo-branch").
>
> I think I have a nice generalization of your proposal to achieve these
> short branch nicknames. (If that is desirable as you doubt below is
> another question.)
>
> The projectrule property could contain a mapping from nicknames to
> subdirs, eg:
>
> crazy branches/users/jim/experimental/crazy
> beta branches/beta
> a branches/alpha
If you add a wildcard syntax, so that we could say
rel-* tags/releases/rel-$1
with the right hand side "$1" referring to whatever was matched by
the left hand side "*", then I think you have all the capabilities of
the rewrite rules proposal. If the nickname rules are optional, and
everything works (just without nicknames) in the presence of only the
projectroot and treeroot properties, then you also have something that's
easier to set up (in common simple cases) than rewrite rules. I think
we have a winner.
--apb (Alan Barrett)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Nov 13 17:37:44 2005