Is CVS better for viewing commit history??

Hi,

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Subversion. But I think I just found a big
*downside* to treating trunk/branch/tags as simple directories rather than
intrinsic subversion entities.

I cannot find a way to view a complete history on a file that includes
commits from ALL Branches plus trunk.

Scenario:
1. Create file foo.txt on trunk.
2. Make changes to file too.txt on trunk.
3. Create Branch A, Switch to Branch A
4. Make lots of changes to file foo.txt on Branch A. Perform several commits
on the branch.
5. Look at history, *beautiful*, see all commits on trunk and on Branch A,
because SVN keeps history across file copies.
6. Merge branch changes back to trunk...switch to trunk.
7. **PROBLEM** Viewing history on the trunk does not show me the
intermediate commits made on the branch. The only commits I will see are
those made on the trunk, and then one that says 'merged from Branch A to
trunk'. If a developer on the branch made a commit comment with some vital
information, I will never see it if I do search the history from the trunk.

This is a big downside, does everyone agree? In CVS all changes made to a
file, no matter on what branch, are viewable with a single history command.

If I'm missing something, or if there's a workaround, please correct me! I
love Subversion and am sticking with it, I just don't like having to
sacrifice something that's available in CVS.

Thanks,
Larry

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Is-CVS-better-for-viewing-commit-history---tp14449118p14449118.html
Sent from the Subversion Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org