Josef Wolf wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 07:48:08AM -0700, Julian Fitzell wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
>
>>I usually end up updating to the next tagged revision eventually.
>>Sometimes I might be making local changes as well, some times not.
>
>
> This is _exactly_ the answer I expected! This means that your mixed WC
> is only a temporary state and you get rid of it when you are done
> instead of starting to commit/merge in this state.
>
> Given that it is only a temporary state and it is used seldom I repeat
> my claim: I don't believe that those use-cases are so frequent that it
> is worth to burden the day-by-day use.
Sorry, to jump back in again so late (I was away for a long weekend) and
I certainly don't want to carry on the argument just for the sake of it.
But, I should clarify that I don't consider it a temporary state. I
consider such a working copy to be constantly in a mixed state. It's
just that occasionaly, around a release date, the number of mixed
revisions happens to be 1. Undoubtedly I would continue to pull down
some new versions again once I've updated.
Again, this is only certain types of projects - the ones that I both
desire to keep working most of the time, want to stay relatively current
on, and want to tinker with myself.
Honestly, I don't personally care whether it's post-1.0 or not since
version numbers are just that - I'll use the product when it supports
everything I need. But I'm not sure I'd move over fully to subversion
until I was no longer being told I had to update all my files or none of
them.
Julian
--
julian@beta4.com
Beta4 Productions (http://www.beta4.com)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Aug 5 13:16:25 2002