On Nov 15, 2006, at 21:14, Tim Hill wrote:
> On Nov 15, 2006, at 5:25 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On Nov 15, 2006, at 17:06, Tim Hill wrote:
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> Well, it's not hard to write a script to determine the last
>> changed revision given a URL:
>>
>> $ lastchangedrev.sh http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/tags/1.4.2
>> 22210
>>
>> You can incorporate that into other shell commands directly; no
>> need to transcribe any revision number by hand:
>>
>> $ svn log http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn \
>> -r`lastchangedrev.sh http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/tags/1.4.2`
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>> r22210 | maxb | 2006-11-04 06:00:43 -0600 (Sat, 04 Nov 2006) | 1 line
>>
>> Tagging release 1.4.2 with svn_version.h matching tarball.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>>
>> You can write any manner of scripts to simplify what you see as
>> routine Subversion operations, if they are not already simple
>> enough for you to use day to day.
>
> My point was portability; the script doesn't work on Windows, for
> example.
It was just a proof of concept. If Windows support is important to
you, there are many languages that also work on Windows, including
Perl, Python, Ruby... Pick one you like.
> And imho "its just another little script..." on top of 100+ other
> "just a little script" ends up breaking the camels back.
Well.... all I can say is that you have to pick software knowing its
cost. The cost of Subversion is the time it takes to learn how to use
it, and maybe some programming expertise writing little scripts or,
for more extensive modifications, modifying its source code. If you
come up with something really snazzy, you contribute it back to the
community and everybody benefits. On the other hand, the cost of many
other version control systems is hundreds or thousands of dollars,
perhaps even per-user license fees, plus perhaps consulting fees,
plus the fact that it's closed-source so you cannot improve or change
the code if you find deficiencies so you have to convince and pay the
developers to do so.
To my mind, Subversion is quite a bargain. Sure, there's room for
improvement, but that can be said of most software, I think.
Fortunately, with open-source software, you can participate in the
improvement, through patches to the source code or through little
scripts. I just mainly wanted to counter your statement that you
"cannot use the tag on the command line to represent, symbolically, a
revision number" since, with a little script, you can.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Nov 16 07:26:39 2006