|
From: | Steven Grimm |
Subject: | [Monotone-devel] Re: thought on hierarchical branches |
Date: | Thu, 17 Aug 2006 08:38:23 -0700 |
User-agent: | Mail/News 1.5.0.2 (Macintosh/20060324) |
So, I was leaning towards something more like svn trunk branch/foo etc.
That's one of the things that's broken about Subversion (or at least most people's use of it) in my opinion. I think that there should be no distinction other than local naming conventions between a "trunk" and a "branch". BitKeeper, for example, gets this exactly right, though it obviously takes a very different approach to branch storage than Monotone.
Monotone should indeed remember what the parent of a particular branch is, as others have mentioned, if only to allow convenient defaults for pushing/pulling changes from a common integration branch (which will be a very common operation.) But you should be able to reparent any branch at any time, which to me means the branch name should not represent its place in the hierarchy at all.
For example, I might have a branch "com.foo.newfeature1". Initially that branch was derived from "com.foo.release16". Now my schedule slips and I won't make it into that release. I should be able to reparent my branch under "com.foo.release17" and not change anything else. In particular, other people should be able to continue to refer to my branch by its functional name, not by a name that implies which release it's part of. Otherwise I will have to make sure everyone else knows when I change my parent.
Of course, for sites that *do* want hierarchical names that map to a branch hierarchy, there's nothing to stop them from establishing a local naming convention.
-Steve
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |