[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: I miss tags

From: Mark Phippard <MarkP_at_softlanding.com>
Date: 2004-09-23 20:47:26 CEST

Make sure you use Reply to all in your mail reader so that the mailing
list gets your replies.

"Raye Raskin" <rayer@pobox.com> wrote on 09/23/2004 02:36:21 PM:

> I'm still learning svn, but for me, symbolic references (names) are
> easier to identify with and remember, e.g., "Release1_0", than 1837.
>
> Clearly a little file could be used to map human readable names to
> global revision numbers. Is that too klugy to put in svn?

No one is arguing that symbolic names are not more friendly, the question
is how best to implement them, if at all, while maintaining many of the
"tenants" upon which svn is based. Where would this file go? How would
it get to the clients? Those are the specific questions I talked about
later on in the past email message.

Also, I believe from past messages, many people have pointed out that you
can accomplish many of these "symbolic" references in your command line
shell if that is what you want. Simply define a variable named
"Release1.0" that defines the URL of the tag. Then reference the variable
in your command line in place of the URL.

> > See, now this is the real issue. It is a legitimate request and has
been
> > mentioned before. Someone just needs to come up with a clever way to
> > implement it. I suspect that the first thing we need is the idea of
> > central configuration properties that are hosted in the repository.
Once
> > this problem is solved, it should be possible to build on top of that.
For
> > example, perhaps you could define aliases that refer to URL's and then
use
> > those aliases in the commands.
>
> Fair enough. Wouldn't some (additional) structure enforced in the
> repo help? All programs have rules -- even in the Unix/Linux "wild
> and willy anything goes survival of the fittest" atmosphere. Having
> trunk, branches, and tags required would make your aforementioned
> clever implementation easy?

I don't think so, I think it would be a terrible idea. I do not know how
new you are to this list, but just this week there have been several
different threads about repository layout for documentation. Those people
did not want trunk and branches folders, why force them? I am not sure
that it would make it that much easier to implement symbolic names anyway.

Mark

_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 23 20:48:00 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.