On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 12:26:05AM +0100, Branko Cibej wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
> > Seperate repositories at the file level seems over-the-top to me.
> > Per-directory is fine, but per-file? No way... that just feels like it will
> > get confusing as hell for the user.
> >
> > Which file is from where? What happens when you add a file?
>
> You don't "svn add" a file to a configuration. Configurations are
> effectively what CVS modules are (or rather, CVS modules are a subset of
> configurations). OTOH you could always require that "svn add" under a
> configuration needs an explicit repository parameter.
Oh... I understand this...
>...
> > This just feels like a "we can build this, so let's do it" feature. I like
> > to take the pointer of view of "a feature exists because we *should*, not
> > because we *can*."
>
> Nope, far from that. For instance, the top of the Subversion SVN tree
> could be a configuration, saying "take apr from
> apr.apache.org/home/cvspublic, take neon from www.webdav.org/neon, take
> everything from svn.tigris.org/subversion." And that's just a simple
> example. In practice you'd be able to have a configuration track a
> certain version or tag in a foreign repository, e.g., pick up only those
> parts of APR tagged APR_STABLE, or whatever.
And your example talks about *directories*. I entirely agree that we want
per-directory repositories. But per-file is just too much.
And yah... "theoretical" configurations could certainly want to refer to an
individual file, but ... blarg. Theoretical.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:16 2006