Re: revnum (still) considered harmful
From: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: 2002-12-16 23:39:12 CET
On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 16:29, Tom Lord wrote:
I'm not sure how your hypothetical distributed repository is going to
> So, I think that both the intra-repository and global revision names
Well, here's how I think we'd implement this if we were going to:
* Commits would acquire an optional parameter for the revision name.
* The revisions table would contain mappings from names as well as
* Revision specifications could be given as names as well as the
* When it comes time to store merge history, use <guid,name> tuples
I don't really like this idea because:
* Ignoring the merge history aspects, it feels like window dressing.
* I don't really buy that smart merging between different pieces of
* You can no longer compress merge history using revision ranges (or
At any rate, it's most likely pointless to try to design a merge history
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.
This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.