Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 22:24:23 +0100 From: Stijn Hoop <stijn@win.tue.nl> To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Subversion? (Re: HEADS UP: Importing csup into base) Message-ID: <20060304212423.GD46967@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> In-Reply-To: <20060304194030.GA2826@tara.freenix.org> References: <20060304141957.14716.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20060304152433.W61086@fledge.watson.org> <BA422F74-E7F9-4F53-9A88-B89E2255FF00@behanna.org> <20060304174835.GA58184@thened.net> <20060304194030.GA2826@tara.freenix.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--+nBD6E3TurpgldQp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 08:40:30PM +0100, Ollivier Robert wrote: > According to Alec Berryman: > > Branches and tags are both implemented in terms of an underlying "copy" > > operation. A copy takes up a small, constant amount of space. Any copy > > is a tag; and if you start committing on a copy, then it's a branch as > > well. (This does away with CVS's "branch-point tagging", by removing the > > distinction that made branch-point tags necessary in the first place.)" >=20 > But you don't know when (time or changeset based) you did branch somethin= g. > This is bad IMO. Eh? Where did you get that impression? Did you test this? %%% [stijn@tangaloor] <~> svn log -r 415 https://svn.sandcat.nl/repos/sws/tags/= SWS_0_4_2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r415 | stijn | 2005-01-06 12:21:04 +0100 (Thu, 06 Jan 2005) | 3 lines - Tag 0.4.2 for BCF use [stijn@tangaloor] <~> svn log https://svn.sandcat.nl/repos/sws/tags/SWS_0_4= _2/include/main.php ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r415 | stijn | 2005-01-06 12:21:04 +0100 (Thu, 06 Jan 2005) | 3 lines - Tag 0.4.2 for BCF use ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r411 | stijn | 2004-12-07 13:57:39 +0100 (Tue, 07 Dec 2004) | 20 lines =2E.. %%% Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but that seems to me to be the information you were looking for. Now, like I wrote earlier, IMO all current vcs's store enough information about 'changesets' so that converting them is rather more trivial than converting anything from RCS/CVS to a current vcs. I like Subversion myself but it's possible that there's a better fit for the project. But like Robert wrote, someone will have to set up a real repository etc. before anyone can knowledgeably comment on the use for the FreeBSD project. --Stijn --=20 "An adult is a child who has more ethics and morals, that's all." -- Shigeru Miyamoto --+nBD6E3TurpgldQp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFECgWHY3r/tLQmfWcRAsj1AJ9EnszpX5paVuowo9UOBLr8KZbHgACgj0yr 6VgQHCe2hfNZSFRHibIkfvc= =r2r2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --+nBD6E3TurpgldQp--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060304212423.GD46967>