Just nevermind.
Doesnt seem like a place willing to accept new ideas -- or for that matter even
talk about them. The process seems to be "suggest", get told to "STFU".
As for "sarcasm" did you not notice the smileys? Im not the one being bloody
hostile. I make a simple request and people beat me to hell ... thats fine ...
thats ok ... no prob ... I know when Im not wanted ..
*backs out the way he came in*
*makes sure door doesnt hit him in ass*
-- kraythe
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 01:14:51AM +0200, Robert Simmons wrote:
> > > Speaking from the perspective of someone who has used CVS since the
> > > mid-nineties, I think this is more about changing our behavior and
> > > assumptions than about changing the tool.
> >
> > That would be cool. =) Now you just need to convince 100 million corporate
> > drones that think they know it all. =) Sometimes you have to compromise and
give
> > people a feel of the old as you introduce the new.
>
> Fine. Lets talk about features instead of implementation details.
> SVN uses a repository-wide revision number to transact changes. Let's
> consider that an implementation detail.
>
> > > 2) A CVS-like revision number can be recovered from the log by
> > > counting the number of entries.
> >
> > NICE. Then data migration wont be so hard. =)
>
> Look. Sarcasm, while generally appreciated, isn't furthering the
> discussion. You ask for a feature. If several people say that that
> feature is available but only in strawberry (for the time being) and
> then you say you're allergic to strawberry...what sort of response do
> you expect.
>
> Apparently, your users use the CVS file version number. How do they
> use it? Are we talking about putting a revision count in each file as
> a keyword? That sounds like a straightforward feature to add to SVN.
> But you aren't saying this. What I'm reading is that if SVN isn't
> *exactly* the same as CVS but with more features then this is a no go.
> Well, so be it. Apparently, the nay sayers about GNU/Linux replacing
> Windows have found that *equivalence* is sufficient to warrant their
> change. Some users, perhaps not yours, will find that the case with
> SVN, too.n
>
> Get it? The rude responses you've received on this list just _might_
> be related to your ASCII tone.
>
> >
> > > 3) Tagging is much more effective in subversion than CVS and should
> > > be used accordingly.
> >
> > Thats good too, but Id hate to have to tag every time I changed a file.
>
> Again, you're allergic. But no one on this list knows your doctor
> well enough to predict that.
>
> You help us. We'll help you.
>
> Let me put this another way. We all know that CVS has it's bothersome
> flaws. The good folks who've written SVN have done a fine job of
> addressing many of those flaws. Just as CVS appeared in corporate
> offices because of user input, so will SVN.
>
> Cheers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Oct 22 01:55:01 2003