RE: Slightly less simple labels (PML part 2)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phyrefly [mailto:phyrefly.phyre@gmail.com]
>
> Can I suggest that the next step up from this is: "Working
> man's labels" or WML would be on a per-file basis, so that
> rev 3 of files A, B, and C would hold a label, but not files
> D, E and F? (this would probably naturally include the
> possibility of having the same label on a different rev of a
> different file, I can't see an implementation that would
> include the former and not the latter) Possibly replace
> "file" with "folder" in that description, although I'd prefer not to.

In the discussion we had regarding labelling, fixing bugs, and branching, I think you said that you wanted to allow branches/1.0.1/C to replace trunk/C in the label if it had become necessary to fix C for the 1.0 label. Is this what you mean by intention with "Different Rev of a different file"?

Tony
 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Nov 21 17:09:18 2006