Well, I for one think labels would be "safer", even if it might not be
"impossible to accidentally revision-labels". It would be *harder* to do
the wrong thing (change an immutable tag/label) and *easier* to do the
right sort of thing (diffs etc across labels). Isn't that part of good
design???
If labels were well-known directory properties, a change to a label
would be a normal logged change to a repo. Technically, that makes it on
a par with an accidental change to a tag as far as logging and noticing
changes. OTOH, with file changes going on all over the place, a label
change is more likely to be noticed (manually or automatically) than a
file checkin, since such a change is first-class, rather than second-class.
I don't think a good, usable label design *has* to make the kinds of
guarantees you seem to be demanding. Tags certainly do not -- and your
arguments against labels could be applied equally to them. IOW, I think
labels could be better than tags, but not perfect -- but after all, what is?
--Tim
Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> Are you somehow suggesting that revision-labels would be safer than
> the current implementation of tags? That it would be impossible to
> accidentally revision-labels? Or that if they were accidentally
> changed, the change would always be noticed? I'd like to hear about
> a design that makes that guarantee.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue May 10 00:36:19 2005