I've read this three times, and I'm still confused why this is any better
than current "cheap" copies. I see your proposed solution / implementation,
but I don't yet understand why it is substantially better enough to warrant
the added functionality. I suppose the only value I see here (and is solved
by Subclipse) is that you'd have some record that a tag were created in the
source. Beyond that, I'm not really sure. Maybe I need to read it a forth
time.
-----Original Message-----
From: hakon@ion.no [mailto:hakon@ion.no]
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 2:35 PM
To: dev@subversion.tigris.org
Subject: Re: Tags
Note the similarity of this solution to the current Subversion-like tags.
But instead of copying a TARGET@REVISION directory to a directory (named
TAG) in the tags directory, the REVISION is stored as the property value of
a property name TAG on the TARGET. And so it is easy to implement, and not
too different from Subversion-like tags.
Håkon Hallingstad
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jun 30 22:04:15 2006