Re: Equivalent of "cvs rtag -F"

Stefan Sperling <stsp@elego.de> writes:

> You don't have to mention "branches" or even "tags" to students
> working with Subversion.
>
> In fact these concepts can be explained easier than in CVS:
>
> A tag is a copy of a directory that is (voluntarily) never
> ever changed again.
>
> A branch is a copy of a directory that is changed further
> after the copy has been made.

The fact that Subversion implements branch with "copy" doesn't mean
that a branch _is_ a copy. There's no point having branches if you
don't have merge, and there's very little point having it if you don't
have switch.

> But why do you even require your students to set a tag?

As I said in my initial message, that allows them to continue working
_and commititing_ close to the deadline. They can make a commit
they're not 100% sure about, let other people review and test it, and
then, after thinking twice, put a tag.

> They could also tell you the revision number of their final
> version (shown to them at every commit).

That's a really primitive solution. That means we'd have to implement
something to collect >60 version numbers (we have >200 students by
group of 4). The revision control system is the tool with which I want
to manage revisions, I don't want another tool to simulate tagging.

> Or you could check out their project state at deadline time
> by checking out by date (which would also work in CVS).

This doesn't allow them to commit an "unofficial version" (i.e. a
version for test, not taken into account by us until the tag).

Well, we might go for this solution, but that would be a regression
compared to what we used to do with the old CVS.

At the moment, it seems the best solution is "delete; copy", but I
don't like the window it lets without the tag present.

-- 
Matthieu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org