On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 01:35:25PM +0200, brane@xbc.nu wrote:
>...
> > I admit that such use-cases are very rare and that it does not make much
> > sense to implement it before-1.0. But you can not say that there are _no_
> > such cases.
>
> What I'm saying is that a version control tool should be just that -- a version
> control tool. Not a repository for unversioned files.
Brane,
People have all kinds of reasons for requesting certain types of
functionality. Just because you disagree doesn't mean their use case is
invalid. You might not agree to make the changes to support that use case,
but please go a bit easier when you question what people are trying to do.
It is entirely possible there is a lot more thought and reasoning behind
their query that they omitted for brevity. If you out-of-hand reject their
use case, after they've applied a lot of thought, can come off as "man, that
guy is being a jerk and hasn't listened to what I'm talking about." The
person making a request sees a rejection as irrational since (in their mind)
they have a perfectly valid proposal with plenty of supporting rationale.
Personally, I can see unversioned files as a very handy feature. Yes,
Subversion is a version control system, but an unversioned file type is a
minor step to a great content management / publishing tool. I'm certainly
not about to reject it out of hand. I'd be quite curious what it would
actually take to implement such a thing.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Apr 1 04:33:08 2003