Re: problem with source path validation

Jody Shumaker wrote:
> > You can copy /trunk to /tags/xyz in your WC and then commit that,
> > which is just as good as a server-side copy.
>
> Many of us have working copies far to large to checkout the base of
> the repository, especially after creating numerous tags and branches.

Sure, just mentioning that it's fair use.

> > It has advantages over a server-side copy, for example if you have
> > fixed version numbers you can modify those before commit.
>
> Shouldn't this have been already modified and committed before the tag
> is created?

Definitely not:

If someone accidentally installs a trunk version, I don't want that
display the version as whatever was last released, fx. "1.2.3". I
want it to display as "1.2-DEVEL", which is what is in the version
number in trunk.

> > Commit to a tag can also be useful for hotfixes, makes it easy to see
> > which hotfixes are/should be applied to which version of your product.
>
> This goes against what a tag is supposed to be.

I don't think so. Not per my definition at least :-).

> If you start modifying it with hotfixes then it is really conceptually
> a branch, not a tag.

The modifications do no harm - the original version still exists as
the first revision in the tag.

It's really just an immensely useful way of keeping track of hotfixes.

> Normal procedure I use is to copy the tag to a branch if
> I'm going to start modifying it.

Extra work for you, I guess, both keeping track of whether there are
hotfixes to a particular version and when applying those. (And extra
harddrive space wasted if you'd ever decide to check it all out.)

> If you're not goign to use tags as just simple names mapping to a specific revision,
> then why don't you just use branches?

Because they're conceptually tags.
They represent the versions that we've released.

> Then you won't see this warning.

But then I would be wrongfully calling "tags" for "branches" and
confusing everyone.
Bad tradeoff.

> Since subversion doesn't really have any specific concept of tags and
> branches, just copies of directories, you can really name all this
> stuff whatever you want and use it however you want. Many of us are
> however following stricter definitions of what a tag and branch are,
> and greatly appreciate the warning. Instead of the dialog being
> removed, maybe a checkbox could be added to supress the dialog from
> coming up in the future?

Sounds like a fine suggestion that would make everyone happy.

(It's not a particularly big deal though, just an itch.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jun 8 16:25:48 2006