On Sep 29, 2004, at 12:30 AM, Justin Randall wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Palmer" <scott.palmer@2connected.org>
>> It is useful to see
>> labels from the trunk's perspective, is there a subversion command
>> that
>> can tell me every branch that was created as a copy from a specific
>> main-branch (trunk), and the revision at which the copy was made,
>> regardless of where those copies are in the repository? Having to
>> find
>> every leaf to see how it relates to the tree seems cumbersome.
>
> Why is this useful?
It is useful because if I am making a change I want to know who or what
might be affected. If there is no way to see who else is working on or
with the same code that makes things difficult.
In Visual Source Safe you could get the properties of a file and it
would show you the links that file had to all the other projects it was
branched or *shared* to. You could see what other projects or modules
you were affecting if you changed that file.
That was more important with true "sharing" - where there was only one
current version of the file that was always the same regardless of the
nodes in the repository tree through which it was accessed. Since
Subversion does not have that feature, the file must be branched and
repeatedly merged to share it in the same way. (I'm aware there are
other ways to deal with the problem of using the same file in multiple
projects - that's not the point.) How do you tell who has a branched
copy of your file? It's easy with VSS, can it be done easily with
Subversion?
This relates to labeling only in the sense that the view is from the
trunk looking out. Looking back along the trunk I would like to see
labeled milestones, Not a separate list of milestones/labels/tags
that I then must then relate back to the trunk. It's a presentation
issue. primarily. The idea of an alternative labeling mechanism that
is not so disconnected from what it is labeling (from the perspective
of the original).
I think there is more to it than simply learning a new way to do
things. A copy of X called Y is something new. A label 'Y' on a
version of 'X' CAN be thought of as a copy of that version of 'X'
renamed 'Y', but you have other changes that happen with that concept.
Does 'X' know it was copied to 'Y'? or is it only 'Y' that knows it
came from 'X'? How easy is it to identify the relationship? The new
copy 'Y' takes on a life of it's own, yet a simple label on 'X' does
not. The underlying implementation is not the issue. But how it is
presented *appears* to make a difference. That appearance can be
important in conveying meaning, or simply making things easier to use.
I've said about as much as I can on the issue. And quite frankly it
isn't important enough to me to have even taken it this far. I think
I'll just shut up now :)
Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Sep 29 07:24:43 2004