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

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

From: Zé <jose.passes_at_gmx.com>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 17:24:33 +0100

On 05/13/2013 06:23 PM, Andreas Krey wrote:
> No, the basic difference is that VCS operating on the whole tree can
> only have branches (and thus merge info) on the whole tree either, so
> you*can't* go like subversion does and map branches into the tree and
> need to have them (and tags) as a separate concept.

Compared to how other SCM systems handle tags, subversion also doesn't
have tags as a separate concept. Subversion provides a way to pinpoint
each commit objectively and unambiguously by specifying specific
revisions. The only difference between subversion and other SCM systems
is that other systems offer support for labeling and adding useful info
to those revisions, while Subversion doesn't.

If you are referring to the ad-hoc method of copying the trunk/branch to
a subdirectory then all that you're doing is copying the trunk directory
to another directory in your repository. That may be a convenient hack,
but that isn't exactly support for tagging.

Let's put it this way: if that was actually a tag then it could also be
argued that any file system supports branching/tagging.

Received on 2013-05-18 18:25:10 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.