On 10/07/2011 06:59 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>>> I think this is an exciting feature with lots of potential but
>>> it has a lot more inherent complexity than improving 'svn mergeinfo'
>>> output. Could we split improving the output of 'svn mergeinfo' and
>>> identifying branch roots into two distinct feature branches?
>
> Splitting it wouldn't work for me, because the branch marker information
> has no purpose and no defined requirements without the mergeinfo user
> interface work; the existence and meaning of the info goes hand-in-hand
> with developing some ways in which that info can be used.
>
> When we come to integrate some of this work to trunk, by then the
> specification of the branching info will have been worked out, and so
> then it may be best to create a feature branch specifically for adding
> that (without the mergeinfo changes) if it is complex enough to be
> worthwhile doing so.
Seems sane to me. If all you need is an property whose mere presence
matters, we can add meaning to specific values later.
>>>> +/* Set *MARKER to the project-root marker that is common to SOURCE and
>>>> + * TARGET, or to NULL if neither has such a marker.
>>>
>>> Why do you need to introduce a new term "project"?
>
> That's not a very good term, and I started by calling it a "branch-root
> marker", because it does indeed mark a branch root, but I wanted a name
> that says the value of this property is the name of the "code base" or
> "project tree" that has been branched, rather than the name of the
> branch. I'm open to better ideas.
Yeah, it's not a very good term at all because "project root" is an
established term in Subversion already (and has been for a decade) -- and
not the same thing you're trying to describe here.
The thing you are describing is a branch root, so just call it what it is.
("svn:branch-root" is what I suggested a couple of years ago for this.)
Even when you set the property the first time on, say, your trunk, you are
declaring the existence of a conceptual branch of the
codebase-as-a-tree-metaphor, if the only such branch extant at the time.
--
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on 2011-10-07 17:08:59 CEST