Well, playing devil's advocate, why would you NOT want to tag the HEAD
revision? As per convention with SVN, you generally make tags from your
trunk, and often times, trunk is considered to be a relatively pristine
copy. Your development work should generally be done in a branch and then
when it becomes stable, you will merge that back into your pristine trunk.
And since you seldom tag branches, your logic somewhat falls apart.
Then from that point, your argument against branching from HEAD is moot as
well. Generally you branch from your trunk, and being that trunk is the
"latest and greatest" and should be clean, you would (almost) always want to
branch from the HEAD of trunk.
On top of all this, by default, in SVN, operations occur on HEAD unless you
specify something else. There's no reason why you'd want to go with another
convention for TortoiseSVN and confuse people when switching between the SVN
command line client and TortoiseSVN.
_____
From: Hans-Emil Skogh [mailto:Hans-Emil.Skogh@tritech.se]
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 6:33 AM
To: dev@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Subject: Suggestion: Branch/tag-dialog change
Hi all!
I would like to suggest a modification to the "Copy (Branch / Tag)"-dialog.
In my opinion we should change the order (and default selection) of the
radio button choices. I would suggest to move "Specific version in
repository" to the top and make it default with the current revision of the
selected WC entered in the revision field. "HEAD revision in the repository"
should be moved to the bottom.
The reason I'm suggesting this is because it's an unsafe working practice to
make a tag from repository-HEAD since there's no way to know what you are
tagging. With branching it's not as bad, but still a "worst practice"*.
I would even go as far as wanting to provide some kind of warning for using
"HEAD revision in the repository", but it might be enough to move it to the
bottom of the choices. Having it as the default choice is, well, bad. :-)
I would also suggest changing some texts to clarify:
"From WC at URL:" -> "From URL:" or "From URL in repository:" or "Origin
URL:" or similar. The path is showing the source path in the repository that
the copy will be made from. Mentioning the WC there is confusing.
"Repository" ("box" caption) -> "Copy" or "Details" or similar maybe?
"Repository" is to broad and unclear.
Hans-Emil
* Opposite of best practice
Received on Wed Jun 21 13:25:36 2006