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

Re: subversion module system question

From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman_at_collab.net>
Date: 2002-05-22 14:49:32 CEST

"Mats Nilsson" <mats.nilsson@xware.se> writes:

> Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> writes:
> > $ svn cp -r 1000 /trunk /module-snaps/rev1000
> > $ svn propedit /modules/mutha
> > (add line:
> > /somelib /module-snaps/rev1000/foo/somelib
> > )
> > $ svn commit /modules/motha
> >
> >
> > IOW, to pin a particular revision for containment within the module, you
> > make a copy to somewhere, and then refer to the (pinned) copy.
> >
> > That is called a "user strategy" and is Badness(tm).
>
> Please set me straight. Why is this considered Badness:
> svn cp -r 1000 /trunk /module-snaps/rev1000
>
> while this is not?
> svn cp -r 1000 /trunk /tags/foobar-1.0

Greg's not saying that using 'svn cp' to create
tags/branches/cheap-copies is a Badness.

He's saying that it's Bad for a module system to *require* that you
make a cheap-copy, so that a particular module can always point to
that location in HEAD.

Instead, a particular module is simply going to point to (revision,
path) pairs. No copies required.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed May 22 14:52:43 2002

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