Re: First impressions...

On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 12:10:43PM -0600, Eric M. Hopper wrote:
 
> > I think the Subversion method of doing branches and tags is... bold, but
> > worth experimenting with. It actually flows out of your arguments about
> > having a single namespace.
>
> Hmmm...
>
> What about if you want version x of most of the tree to be part
> of a particular revision, but version y of a particular subsystem?
> Would you have to create a branch in which that was the case for it to
> work that way?

you're still thinking of branches and tags as two different things,
which in svn isn't really true. a 'tag' is just a copy. when we
tagged version 0.8, all we did was run:

svn cp http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk \
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/tags/0.8

(or something like that...)

it's just a copy. if you wanted to have a version tagged that
consisted of the trunk's version of most things, but a version of
libsvn_fs that was developed on a branch that was working to make a
non berkeley db filesystem (for example...) you would do the same
copy we did before, then another copy like this:

svn cp
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/branches/berkeley-db-sucks/subversion/libsvn_fs
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/tags/0.8/subversion/libsvn_fs

(yeah, the urls get long, but a gui client will eventually be able to
deal with that...)

now you've got what is debatably a 'branch', but for all intents and
purposes is a 'tag', with a special version of libsvn_fs. branches
and tags are both just copies.

i'm not sure if i've been totally clear, so if i haven't, just ask and
i'll try again.

-garrett

-- 
garrett rooney                     Unix was not designed to stop you from 
rooneg@electricjellyfish.net       doing stupid things, because that would  
http://electricjellyfish.net/      stop you from doing clever things.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org