On 2001-08-03 22:20:04 Greg Hudson wrote:
>> Branch foo or bar:
>
>I know what kind of distinction you're getting at, but when talking
>about Subversion it's really best to avoid the terms "branch" or
>"tag." We have cheap directory copies. If you make a copy and set it
>read-only, that's like a tag. If you make a copy and set it
>read-write, that's like a branch. There's no separate concept of a
>branch or a tag.
Point taken, definitely; I only allowed myself to talk about
branches on the grounds that I was trying to emulate behaviour
seen in another system.
The idea of calling these vnodes/modules "references" works well
with the "copy" terminology, because if you copy a reference, you
would expect it to still refer to the same thing.
You said *directory* copies, specifically; but the explanation
in the Design document with those wonderful ascii drawings
would appear to apply equally to files. You're just copying a
pointer to a node revision. Imagine the diagrams without the
"tuna" box, with "fish" a file - it all still works. So is it
allowed in Subversion?
Peter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:35 2006