> On the user list a discussion (Road map 1.1) about labels came up.
> Ben suggested discussion on this list before raising an issue.
>
> Users expect to see the symbol name (label) when viewing the
> history of an item. Users expect to be able to use the symbolic
> name where a revision number can be used.
The problem I see with just adding aliases for revisions is that...
suppose you have this:
/prj/trunk
/prj/tags/release-1.0
The revision number is for the whole repository. So it applies to both
the trunk and the tag. It's not a point in the development timeline,
it's a state of the *repository*, which is not the same.
Perhaps the solution is to reduce the "freeness" of the tagging and
branching scheme. If there was a fixed, enforced naming scheme for tags,
client interfaces could provide more facilities to the user. But it
would be against the spirit of Subversion... but.. why not creating some
way an administrator could write the branching and tagging scheme down?
Subversion could the provide extra management facilities, like enforcing
that people can create tags but not commit in them. And tools would be
able to download this file and use it to provide a much better interface
to the user.... Just some thoughts...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Apr 16 03:14:19 2004