Re: Some design questions (once more)

[ Sorry for replying so lately. I was somewhat busy lately.. ]

On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 10:50:28PM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 02:20:35AM +0200, Josef Wolf wrote:
>
> and honestly, the statement that we are 'module based' rather than
> 'file based' is pretty much completely false. SVN has no concept of
> modules at this time at all, although it may in the future.

I meant "module based" not the way CVS understands modules. I think I
had better be used "project based". Svn have one revision for the
whole directory tree while cvs has its own revision-tree for every
single file.

> it does
> version things other than files (directories specifically, and
> eventually symlinks), but that's not the same as being module based.
> actually, to be entirely accurate, SVN versions tree structures
> (directories and the files they contain).

This is exactly what I tried to express. Since svn versions tree
structures the default behavior should be to avoid inconsistencies
withhin this structure.

-- 
-- Josef Wolf -- jw@raven.inka.de --
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org