On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 02:15:38PM +0100, email@example.com wrote:
> On 2001-10-08 13:55:43 Kevin Pilch-Bisson wrote:
> >On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 01:38:03PM +0100, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> >> Actually, there's a third case: several products
> >> use a library with a very well-defined interface
> >> and release structure. Each product knows which
> >> revision of the library it wants to use. In HOPE
> >> this would be a component; in Subversion it would
> >> be a "static reference", which is a reference to
> >> a particular revision of a node - if I can persuade
> >> this community that this would be a good idea!
> >Isn't this a tag?
> The implementation in HOPE uses tags: instead of saying
> which branch of a sub-compound you want to include, you
> give a tag instead. Subversion doesn't have such a clear
> idea of tags - if you could take a clone, and *guarantee*
> that it would never have any changes made to it, then I
> guess that would give the right effect, yes.
This is definitely planned, although not supported yet. It could easily be
implemented in a pre-commit hook script though.
> I've read in the past that the Subversion equivalent of
> a tag is a read-only clone. Now, is the read-only property
> on the repository or on the files in the repository, if you
> see what I mean? I'm guessing it must be on the repository,
> because the permissions required for the files and dirs on
> disk are completely independent of whether they are allowed
> to change over time.
We haven't worked out the details of how ACL's will work yet. But they will
> This might be simpler than I thought :-)
Kevin Pilch-Bisson http://www.pilch-bisson.net
"Historically speaking, the presences of wheels in Unix
has never precluded their reinvention." - Larry Wall
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:44 2006
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored