On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:35:59 +0100, Peter Valdemar Mørch
<swp5jhu02@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>Duncan Murdoch murdoch-at-stats.uwo.ca |Lists| wrote:
>> If it's a stable branch containing patches for a release, then this
>> wouldn't make sense. Even if you have no plans to continue patches
>> for that release, someone might, someday in the future.
>
>This is almost a FAQ isn't it? "How do I make a branch/tag read-only".
>(It isn't in the FAQ.) Well you can't unless you fiddle with apache
>configuration. (I'm using svn+ssh so I'm out of luck anyway).
>
>I have no idea how difficult it would be to implement, but form a users
>point of view it would make sense to be able to
>
>svn propset -m "Locking the branch" svn:nocommit $url
>
>or something equivalent and have that affect the entire subtree below
>it, preventing commits to it.
>
>But today we can't. (Something for a pre-commit hook? I've never written
>one..)
I can see that would be useful for a tag (which is supposed to be a
snapshot, not a development branch), but I think _philosophically_ it
wouldn't make sense to do that on a branch. A branch is for
development, separate from the trunk. Why would you want a branch
that didn't allow development?
It makes sense to me to delete a branch when you no longer want
development on it. It might make sense to write a utility that could
tell you all the branches that have been deleted (to help in later
resurrection).
Duncan Murdoch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Oct 31 15:53:49 2004