To all tags-vs-branches folks:
(Already I'm walking on thin ice with that opening line! :) Let me
clarify once again: When I speak of tags, I'm talking about the
high-level concept of tagging for historical value. When I speak of
branches, I'm speaking of the high-level concept of branching for the
sake of code divergence - even if only temporary. There, did that fix
it? ;) )
For the sake of closure, and to summarize my experience with this
conversation, I'd have to say that about half of the responses in this
thread were from people who wanted to see Subversion get better -
whatever that meant. The other half were jealously defensive about the
direction and position that Subversion has taken on tags to date. I
don't believe defensiveness is ever productive. Don't get me wrong - I'm
not offended - my wife says I'm too thick skinned for that. But in
general, defensiveness tends to keep one from seeing the possibilities.
Frankly, I've learned a LOT about the use of tags - and for that I
thank you all. I still think there's room for improvement in
Subversion's tag management strategies - it's just quite not as clear to
me what that improvement should look like as it used to be.
In the end, I just hope this conversation was useful to the developers.
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Mar 22 03:04:54 2006