On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 10:58:57AM -0400, Greg Hudson wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 10:45, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > How often does one do annotate?
>
> I will note that some CVS web interfaces make it easier to generate an
> annotated source listing tha a non-annotated source listing. I'm sure
> CVS repositories using those web interfaces get lots of annotate
> operations.
>
> But it's easy enough to say "don't do that, it hurts" for Subversion, in
> which case I'm happy with making annotate slow, for now. (And, as I
> noted, not really slow until you start getting files with many many
> revisions.)
Let me preface this by saying that I'm very interested in using SVN, and have
already used it for a small personal project. But I really think that this
decision would be a real problem for Subversion's adoption by the community
that uses cvs. I know that annotate is a much more common operation for me
(often through the Bonsai web interface) that is moving files, or changing
directory structure. It's invaluable for understanding how the code got into
the situation that it's in.
Further, it's precisely those projects and files with lots (100+) revisions
that need this tool. Something that's only been changed twice has an easy to
understand revision history. Something that has been changed 300 times since
the piece of code in question was committed is where this tool is most
useful.
Finally, the tools, like Bonsai, that have grown up around CVS are so useful
that I, personally, would find it unreasonable to give them up, simply
because Subversion doesn't implement annotate in a way that makes them
possible.
sam th
sam@uchicago.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Aug 13 17:15:10 2002