Re: Proposal for $Revision$ keyword amendment

Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
> No, we cannot make it magically update to reflect the mixed-rev state of
> a working copy without making unacceptable architectural compromises.
>
> If your argument is "this feature is worthless unless it does all the
> magic we can't do", then that's consistent (though not compelling, to
> me). But what's frustrating is that you're not phrasing your argument
> that way. You're assuming I want to do the impossible magic, arguing
> that it can't be done, and leaving it at that.

I think John was just transmitting what he felt Molle Bestefich was
proposing.

I too get the feeling that what Molle wants can't easily be done in
Subversion, and that the best answer is to use the 'svnversion'
program (which was, after all, written to be a workaround for exactly
this problem). However, maybe we're misunderstanding what Molle wants?

Molle, is there a mail that contains a complete (edge-cases included)
description of the feature proposal as it stands right now? If not,
could you post one? What's described in

   http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=106102

is completely uncompelling (to me, anyway). I'm -1 on it. But maybe
the proposal has evolved since then?

-Karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Oct 4 22:38:25 2005