Branko Čibej wrote: > On 17.07.2012 21:08, Julian Foad wrote: >> I know it would be nice and convenient if it was defined centrally >> here, but ... I dunno, others may disagree, but I think we need a much >> more rigorous definition before I'd be happy to consider it. > > Thank you, Julian, for putting it so clearly.
Yeah, well, it seems some people -- cmpilato for one -- do have some non-shallow thoughts about this subject. C-Mike said on IRC: julianf: I think you're looking at things backward. Or maybe I am. I don't want users' haphazard behaviors to inform the server about what appears to be a branch-root. I want a person -- the same person who would fire off the angry email to the idiot that merged and committed a subtree -- to say up front: "Here's our branch-root, server (and client). Now protect it!" I guess what I want is Enversion semantics, implement in Subversion's core with prelim enforcement in the client (as opposed to in a hook script that can only fire after users upload 50Meg of ill-aimed merge commit info). (From <http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/svn-dev?date=2012-07-17#l261>.) May the discussion yet bear fruit. - Julian
