I don't think it really matters what I'm trying to accomplish, my
point stands. There are a number of valid workflows that require the
entry of revision numbers in a command that are obtained from the
output of other commands. These "feedback" workflows are cumbersome
when the rev# has to be transferred by hand or by some script
magically parsing the output of an info/status/log command. If you
want examples, go scan the svn-book, which is full of them.
The "we need labels" argument that keeps on coming up in this forum
is, imho, not about the lack of symbolic identifiers for revision
numbers: everyone points out again and again (correctly) that tags do
that. It's about the need to directly *input* these revision numbers
symbolically into commands. Tags _don't_ do this because the last
step in the "feedback" loop is missing: I cannot use the tag on the
command line to represent, symbolically, a revision number. That was
what I was trying to show by my example.
--Tim
On Nov 15, 2006, at 1:25 PM, Danny van Heumen wrote:
> Tim Hill wrote:
>> I agree .. *getting* the rev# was not the issue, though. It was
>> what I do with it when I've got it:
>> Workflow 1 (today):
>> (1) enter: svn info <some-url>
>> (2) manually scan the output for the rev#, call it X
>> (3) enter: svn diff foo.c -r X:HEAD
> * I assume you mean the location of the tag? --> <some-url>
> * What are you looking for when you're looking for X exactly?
> * Sorry, but I can't follow what you want to do exactly with 3.
> Do you want to perform a 3-way diff between your WC 'foo.c' and the
> changes done between X and HEAD in the repository?
>
> Danny
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Nov 16 00:11:36 2006