On Jun 18, 2005, at 2:11 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> Oh, no, please, let's not start *that* discussion again. We just
> had it a short while ago, on this list, to the tune of several
> hundred messages, and leading me to the inescapable conclusion that
> assigning symbolic names to revisions just doesn't get you
> anywhere. As Ben has been repeatedly pointing out, a revision
> number alone tells you nothing. If my repository has three
> directories at the root level -- foo, bar, and baz, representing
> three separate projects -- then the same point in time -- the same
> revision 12345 -- represents different things in those three
> directories. The current version of foo might be version 1.1, of
> bar 2.5, and of baz 3.1.4. Thus in order to get meaning, you need a
> revision *and* a path. Assigning a label like "VER-1.2.3" to
> revision 12345 is completely useless since a revision number is
> global to the repository but not all three projects in my
> repository are at the same version.
You make me laugh. :-) Yes, I guess I've been repeating myself a
bit, heh.
>
> Possibly you'll tell me that you create separate repositories for
> separate projects. Fantastic; I don't.
The latest point I'm making is that *even* if you have just one
project per repository, you still have multiple copies of the code in
different directories -- due to the way branches and tags work. So a
single revision number *still* isn't enough to identify the "state"
of a project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Jun 18 22:41:02 2005