[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Thoughts about modules

From: <peter.westlake_at_arm.com>
Date: 2001-08-03 23:35:33 CEST

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

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.