RE: Subversion Vision and Roadmap Proposal
From: Bob Archer <Bob.Archer_at_amsi.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 11:30:39 -0400
> > P.S. Pleeeease, introduce true tags, no more "lets pretend this copy
I for one totally agree with this. I can see the copy command being broken up into three commands, branch, fork, tag. I think the huge win would be branch. Sure, internally it would be a copy. But... a property on the branch folder to indicated it is a branch. Also, the merge command should be modified to ensure that all merges were treated as if they are done and the root folder of the branch.
While there is a lot of flexibility with the current scheme... with flexibility adds complexity. And, I agree with what someone else said here or on another thread. People aren't using Git/Hg because it is distributed they are using it because it is FAST and Branches and Tags are first class citizens. I am guessing most teams using Git/Hg do have a central repository that is the "one true copy" of the project which build servers and code reviews, etc all go through. I man, the popularity of this is evidenced by the popularity of GitHub.
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.