Re: Subversion Doesn't Have Branches aka Crossing the Streams aka Branches as First Class Objects?

On 05/11/2013 08:25 PM, Thorsten Schöning wrote:
> I have a repo for binaries of one of our software which doesn't need
> installation, which gets directly deployed to our customers. Each
> customer is something like a branch or tag and some of the customers
> are grouped for some reason, sharing the same parent directories,
> share the same access rights etc.

That's not exactly a development branch, but a directory tree.
Subversion excels at versioning directory trees.

> Some of my repos contain web
> applications installed on different servers, again directly deployed
> as working copies and again different installations on the same server
> are grouped together under the same server name.
>
> I have only little experience with git almost a year ago, but what I
> remember is that git does support tags and branches and neither of
> those could be structured in any way, git only allowed one level for
> tags and branches.

Tags/branches aren't directories which need to be organized in a deep
hierarchical structure.

A branch, as implemented by git, is similar to the feature branches
approach mentioned in the manual, but properly supported by the SCM system.

http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn-book.html#svn.branchmerge.commonpatterns

Wit Git, when a branch is created it is expected to have a finite
lifespan, which is supposed to end either by being merged with the trunk
or being deleted, without leaving any trace on the versioning history.

A tag is nothing but a pointer to a particular point in the repo's history.

-- 
Zé