Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one :) And of
course I see the immense benefits of Subversion -- I wouldn't be here
otherwise!
--Tim
On Nov 15, 2006, at 10:25 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Nov 16 08:06:59 2006