Guten Tag Zé,
am Samstag, 11. Mai 2013 um 23:26 schrieben Sie:
> That's not exactly a development branch, but a directory tree.
That's simply a matter of taste and what I said for customer/server
related hierarchies of tags fits perfectly well for branches which
develop towards e.g. one bigger fe
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Thorsten Schöning
wrote:
>
> I have only little experience with git almost a year ago, but what I
> remember is that git does support tags and branches and neither of
> those could be structured in any way, git only allowed one level for
> tags and branches. That'
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Zé wrote:
> You are misrepresenting the problem. It doesn't matter if subversion isn't
> like any other SCM system. The problem is that the effect of copying,
> renaming or moving a file or directory around, as done by any SCM system, is
> incompatible with what's
On 05/11/2013 08:25 PM, Thorsten Schöning wrote:
I have a repo for binaries of one of our software which doesn't need
installation, which gets directly deployed to our customers. Each
customer is something like a branch or tag and some of the customers
are grouped for some reason, sharing the sam
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Zé wrote:
> On 05/09/2013 09:35 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
>>
>> The real problem here is that Subversion does not treat/renames/ as
>> atomic operations.
>
>
> I think that the real problem here is that Subversion doesn't support
> branches. The fact is that moving
On 05/11/2013 08:46 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 06:45:03PM +0100, Zé wrote:
You are misrepresenting the problem. It doesn't matter if subversion
isn't like any other SCM system. The problem is that the effect of
copying, renaming or moving a file or directory around, as do
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 06:45:03PM +0100, Zé wrote:
> You are misrepresenting the problem. It doesn't matter if subversion
> isn't like any other SCM system. The problem is that the effect of
> copying, renaming or moving a file or directory around, as done by
> any SCM system, is incompatible with
Guten Tag Zé,
am Samstag, 11. Mai 2013 um 19:45 schrieben Sie:
> The existence of a branch shouldn't depend on whether
> someone checked out an older revision or not, and creating a branch
> shouldn't appear on any file's history. Essentially the people behind
> all popular SCM projects understo
On 11.05.2013 19:25, Zé wrote:
> On 05/09/2013 09:35 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> The real problem here is that Subversion does not treat/renames/ as
>> atomic operations.
>
> I think that the real problem here is that Subversion doesn't support
> branches. The fact is that moving or copying a file
On 05/10/2013 02:56 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
It is strange behaviour on a conceptual level if you are used to
thinking in terms of other version control systems (such as ClearCase
in your case).
However, it is a natural consequence of the way Subversion is currently
supposed to represent the c
On 05/09/2013 09:35 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
The real problem here is that Subversion does not treat/renames/ as
atomic operations.
I think that the real problem here is that Subversion doesn't support
branches. The fact is that moving or copying a file or directory around
is not the semanti
Hi List,
I have posted this question on apache httpd server mailing list too, but I
did not get any response, since this problem is related to subversion
write-through proxy, so people may have idea or pointers. My sincere
apology if this is not the right forum to discuss about this problem. Here
12 matches
Mail list logo
