[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: Volker Kopetzky <vk_at_vzkb.de>
Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 20:45:19 +0700

+1 on *plonk*.
I admit, I had fun reading and this is a perfect end to the thread.

Thank-yous to Stefan, Branko and the other contributors in the thread.
There was definitely learning involved on my side (I did not learn most from Ze's replies)

"Let's just stop and think, before I lose face
Surely I can't fall, into a game of chase"
- Crave you


Am 19.05.2013 um 19:37 schrieb Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel_at_gmail.com>:

> On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Zé <jose.passes_at_gmx.com> wrote:
>> On 05/18/2013 07:16 PM, David Chapman wrote:
>>> You are pretty insistent that there is One True Way to use branches in
>>> development.
>> No, I'm stating that if all a SCM does is track changes made to the contents
>> of a directory and you rely on changes made to that directory to emulate
>> branches, then there are some significant downsides to this approach when
>> compared with SCM systems which do offer support for branching.
> You've been doing a lot more. I've read what you've written. You
> consistently ignore your own previous claims, guidance or refutations
> or information from others. You clearly want what you want, the way
> you want it, and will accept nothing less than absolute confirmation
> of your frankly unfounded claims about what branching and tagging
> actually are and how they work, despite numerous references and
> explanations.
> I hate to do this on a really useful technical mailing list. But
> you're clearly wasting everyone's time, and it's time to killfile you.
> *plonk*.
Received on 2013-05-19 15:46:03 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.