>> > just keep a table in a file somewhere known in the repository.
>>
>> this will limit you to use one single tool to work with the
>> repository, because each tool would have its own implementation of
>> 'named tags' and be incompatible to other tools. there must (should)
>> be a common design for this. I have created my own 'hack' for named
>> tags to fit my needs meantime, but I'm unhappy with it because no
>> other tools will ever go and support them.
Jeremy Pereira wrote:
> Which is one reason why it might not be a good idea. Another one is
hat does 'it' refert to here?
> that it is sort of against the conceptual model of Subversion (revision
> aliases are simple to implement so there is probably a philosophical
> reason why the developers haven't implemented them).
the revision aliases are great. i use them 95% of the time.
but 5% of the time i have to ask
"in which releases was this buggy 'file.c' included?"
and want a FAST answer to that, not wading through 26237 log messages
resulting in some 6 mb transferred over my 10kB/s line
or through 1756 "tag" and "branches" folders in 3 different repositories.
when its so easy to lookup the list of tags recorded in a single "Tags"
file that even gets automatically updated/patched on every 'tag' action
by just adding a few bytes. i really like my little buggy ruby --tag
script :)
:-)
c.a.t.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Apr 5 19:23:04 2004