[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: RFC: Untangling the peg revision knot (was: A preliminary study of non-contiguous transformations in the Hilbert space of Alexandrian solutions)

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:50:13 +0100

Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> wrote:
>> I wonder if it would make sense to do a survey on the users@ list about
>> this. I prophesy that most responses would be either "what's a peg
>> revision?" or "yes, I get bitten by that all the time."
> I'd say that understanding a 2-dimensional namespace is going to be
> complicated no matter what we do. We can argue whether the default
> should be HEAD or the operative revision, but I think having the
> default change based on the command or other options would just make
> it more confusing to users.

That all depends on how one defines "consistent" and "predictable",
doesn't it? For example, our current definition includes "for WC paths,
the default is @BASE". Ah well then, does "svn log" with no parameters
operate on a WC path? Technically speaking, it does; as a user, I see
"svn log" as strictly repository-centric.

-- Brane

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-11-26 21:50:32 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.