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 concepts of versioning files and directories,
and labels and branches. And it has done so for over a decade. Changing
this behaviour is far from trivial.

I'm not entirely sure what kind of answer you are hoping to get.
Are you happy with the answer that Subversion is simply not ClearCase?

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 expected out of a development branch. Using svn copy to structure a repo to simulate branches and tags is a hack. 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 understood this right from the start.

Reply via email to