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

RE: help me show others that there are valid reasons for not supporting a $log$ keyword!

From: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday_at_crashcourse.ca>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:04:24 -0400

Quoting "Reedick, Andrew" <jr9445_at_ATT.COM>:

>> From: Steve Povilaitis [mailto:stevepov_at_gmail.com]

>> Our program management is clamoring for including a
>> revision history like the old cvs $log$ keyword at the
>> beginning of every file. I know there are good reasons for
>> not supporting a $log$ keyword or even the idea of
>> including a running log in the file, but if I'm not able
>> to make a case for abandoning the idea, I'm going to be
>> forced into writing some sort of kludgy script to do just
>> that.  I've searched previous posts explaining why this is
>> a bad idea and this is my understanding of some of the key
>> points:
> Turn the question around. What are the benefits of putting the log
> history in each file?
> What is the goal/purpose/benefit of the log? If SVN can provide or
> meet that goal/purpose/benefit, then it shouldn't matter how it's
> implemented. Don't force the Old Inefficient Ways on New Tools.

that will *not* be a compelling argument. the normal response to
that is, "but it won't *hurt*, will it?" when people are absolutely
entrenched in their ways, it is not enough to show that some old
habit no longer has any value. you have to go further and show that
it actually *harms* the process, however you want to do that.

trust me, i've been down this road before. you need to demonstrate
actual harm. if you can't, you're going to lose this one.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-09-16 18:04:48 CEST

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.