[Revctrl] wow signal

[Bruce Stephens]

Thomas Lord <lord at emf.net> writes:

[...]

> [1] As far as I know, the Subversion project will
>      be turning attention to the conversations I
>      tried to start with them once they get 1.0
>      out the door.   Well, that's the last I heard.

1.0 was released some time ago.  1.5 is (I believe) intended to have
some kind of merge-tracking which will make history-sensitive merging
possible.

[...]

> In another is a defensive but not particularly responsive discussion
> of git. [2]

One person's "defensive" is another person's reframing of the problem,
I guess.

git's model is obviously wrong if you care about accurate recording of
file movement, and yes, it'll get it wrong sometimes.  The guess is
that the automatic inference of code movement (even parts of files) is
a win overall over manual recording of this.  That doesn't feel like
an obviously wrong guess to me.

I agree that file tagging would make whole file momevements much more
convenient, but for whatever reasons many people seem opposed to the
idea.

Presuming you've ruled out file tagging, then if you want to accept
changes going through vanilla patches (and that was a requirement for
git) then I guess content inference becomes the obvious choice.

It's a little like subversion's removal of tags and branches: just
have a versioned filesystem and some conventions.  It's clever, and
isn't an obviously wrong idea (and maybe it permits streams and other
concepts that aren't branches or tags, and that *would* be clever),
though I find it unconvincing.

[...]