Re: description of Peg Revision Algorithm is incomplete
Julian Foad wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>> Actually, I don't think that peg revisions (i.e. without following the
>> history) make much sense on objects relative to the current directory
>> (unless its URL has not changed since the peg-rev).
> That is the point I was trying to make: a peg rev specifier as defined
> in this thread does not make any sense on a local path, and so should
> not be allowed.
I deleted a similar statement from a previous mail after convincing myself
that surely we allowed that syntax for *some* reason before. Alas, I still
can't think of a compelling reason to allow it myself. :-P
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on 2010-03-31 14:17:26 CEST
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev