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

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

From: Branko ─îibej <brane_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 12:07:28 +0200

On 19.05.2013 11:46, Thorsten Sch├Âning wrote:
> Guten Tag Andreas Krey,
> am Samstag, 18. Mai 2013 um 22:55 schrieben Sie:
>> All that structure is implicit. Unless someone tells you, you
>> have no ways to deduce which paths of a subversion repository
>> are meaningful to check out and which aren't.
> But that's nearly the same with any other SCMs which support branches
> and tags as "1st class sobjects". You have always to options to decide
> what is a branch or tag, something special in the data model or simply
> some kind of convention. The data model is a better way for knowing
> automatically if something is a branch or tag, no doubt, but one
> should consider the main purpose of SCMs during software development
> and devs use conventions everywhere in their work. It's a known
> concept with some valuable benefits, e.g. flexibility.
> Besides that, knowing what a branch or tag is is only one aspect, this
> tells you nothing about it's purpose and therefore to know if it is
> meaningful to anybody, useful to checkout or something else. Purposes
> of branches and tags need always to be communicated between humans.

I do agree, however, that being able to list the tag and branch names
associated with a particular versioned object would be nice. The trouble
is that it's not exactly obvious what that really means in the context
of Subversion's object model. In other words, hand-waving is not a good
feature specification. :)

-- Brane

Branko ─îibej
Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com
Received on 2013-05-19 12:08:08 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.