RE: Subversion Doesn't Have Branches aka Crossing the Streams aka Branches as First Class Objects?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thorsten Schöning [mailto:tschoening_at_am-soft.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 12:30 PM
> To: users_at_subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Subversion Doesn't Have Branches aka Crossing the Streams
> aka Branches as First Class Objects?
> Guten Tag Bob Archer,
> am Dienstag, 21. Mai 2013 um 17:54 schrieben Sie:
> > Frankly, if you are
> > writing to tags it is more like a branch. ;)
> Of course, that's why it's all about definitions or conventions and my
> writable tags are customer installations of our software which get
> updated to new versions and are used to track configuration changes.
> Nothing I would like to implement using only top level branches and as
> no active development takes place on those directories, I see them
> rather as tags, than branches.
I think of tag-branches as effort saving devices that spare me from having to
svn copy tags/PRODUCTION branches/production
svn rm tags/PRODUCTION
svn copy branches/production tags/PRODUCTION
when a hostname changes in prod and I need to backfill a config file.
Should we call them tag-branches or branch-tags? And should they be first class objects? ;-)
Received on 2013-05-21 19:02:35 CEST
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users