Re: [boost] [1.36.0] Release schedule set

From: Frank Birbacher (bloodymir.crap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-24 17:09:07

Hi!

James Sharpe schrieb:
> Besides I don't think that subversion would move
> away from using paths for branches since its at the very core of how
> it has been designed (the model seems attractive at first but in
> reality it becomes a pain as it allows users to do very silly things
> to the repository)

Attractive Model? Can Do Silly Things? That's the same as with C++, 
isn't it?

The flaw IMO is that the svn up does not follow renaming. But you would 
only want it if the root of your working copy moved. If only a subdir 
moved, i.e. current location was deleted, you don't want svn to switch 
your subdir to the new location.

There are issues with svn. But the model is simple and works quite well. 
Just because the "svn up" command doesn't cope with renames, well, just 
always use "svn switch $MY_SVN_URL_at_HEAD ."

Regards,
Frank