RE: Proposed new aliases, like HEAD

[dbockenf]

Greg woods wrote:
> Having a symbolic name for "TRUNK"
> isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it does crowd the tag namespace

The Cederqvist [v 1.9] suggests in section 7.1 that
"It is expected that future [tag] names which are special to CVS will
contain characters such as '%' or '=', rather than being names analogously
to BASE and HEAD, to avoid conflicts with actual tag names."

I further suggest that new BASE and HEAD tag names be defined using the new
nomenclature, whatever that turns out to be, so all the special tag names
will
be consistent.  The new names would be mere aliases for the current names.
The archaic BASE and HEAD tag names would still have to be supported, but
they could be deprecated.  Future generations will thank us.