[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Subversion tagging

From: Byron Brummer <byron.brummer_at_livenation.com>
Date: 2007-01-22 23:39:08 CET

Steve Bakke wrote:
>> The thing I don't like about this, is that I create a new version of each
>> file every time, but I am not modifying file itself. I am only promoting (or
>> tracking status) of a particular file version.
>> Ok, my point is that adding "tag" functionality will not make subversion
>> dirty, but will make it better, more supporting various configuration
>> management processes.
>> Martins
> The closest thing I have seen to a file revision is if you run 'svn status
> -v' you'll get the last-committed-revision for each file. (you can also get
> this with svn info) The thing CVS users aren't used to is the fact that
> there is no per-file revision.

        This note goes to Ed too:

        Yes, internally there is no "per file revision". Functionally however,
        there very much is. This is particularly notable in mixed revision
        working copies. Copy that WC to a "tag" and you have a snap shot
        of that mixed revision. This effectively gives you per-file revision
        functionality. That's the entire point of WC to URL copy ("tag").

        This is all well and good until someone wants to report based on such
        tag states. Since SVN's "tag" is really a copy you end up with new
        paths and new revisions. This makes it a huge PITA to report the
        differences from one tag to another (not the line by line diff which
        is easy, but the logs for the commits the differences actually


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jan 22 23:40:30 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.