> > No. Subversion way of creating tags via copying is very good
> > for branches and very, very poor for tags. For me lack of
> > tags or labels is also one of the main stoppers against
> > serious subversion use.
>
> I really don't see any point in "tags" other than having names
> for certain revisions. Could someone please enlighten me why
> so many people keep on insisting that tags are important when
> the only use in such a feature in SubVersion would be to have
> an "alias" for a revision number ?
Tags are not only aliases for a revision number. Tags are also
selectors for the set of the files - taking only some of the
files from this revision. In fact, they are a way of marking
which files from which version should be taken into some
software distribution, copied somewhere etc.
It is also not completely true, that tags name given revision. It
an happen that tags spread different repository revisions. Using
CVS I happened placing tags so they marked set of files which if
I were working in subversion would never exist so. Take the
following scenario (we are editing some module):
- I edit file blahblah.cxx and commit
- I edit file trahtrah.cxx and commit
- I add one more change to blahblah.cxx and commit
- I decide that I need to distribute the version containing
current blahblah.cxx but without the last change in trahtrah.cxx
(say, it occured that I can not finish the change in trahtrah
before release date)
In subversion it is not easy to mark such a version.
It is also crucial to be able to easily find which tags where
placed on the module, in what order, what where differences
between the tags etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Apr 2 22:32:10 2004