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

Re: tagging is too heavy, any alternative?

From: Shawn Harrison <harrison_at_tbc.net>
Date: 2005-01-11 16:58:34 CET

Robert Sfeir wrote [01/10/05 6:17 PM]:
>>The tag happens in the repository - it doesn't affect your working copy
>>at all (in fact, you have to "switch" separately if you want to make
>>changes to the tag -- now, branch).
>
>
> And we must be careful to clarify that though the tag is now a branch,
> it doesn't mean that it MOVED to the branches directory, it's still in
> the Tags directory, but is treated like a branch with its own set of
> changed files, and hence can cause much confusion among your peers if
> you're not careful.
>
> R
>

Good point.

It might be easier for newbies if there were only one label for it - a
"copy". But it does make sense to me that the documentation uses "tags"
and "branches", because they are addressing the nomenclature of the CVS
community and of developers in general.

In our publishing house, we have a single publication that goes out in
dozens of different editions, typesettings, printings, etc. We're
beginning to use "copies" to tag each specific edition, so that when a
given edition is reprinted we know exactly what needs to be changed in
the typeset files (by diffing the sources with TRUNK) in order to bring
that edition up to date. For that purpose, the labels "tag" and "branch"
are not really useful. Instead, it makes sense just to have "editions".
But they're all just "copies" at heart.

Take care,

Shawn Harrison

-- 
________________
harrison@tbc.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Jan 11 16:58:35 2005

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