Re: FW: [DESIGN] Aliases? [OT]

[Vincent Starre <vs...@comcast.net>]

Frank Gruman wrote:

> Saulius Grazulis wrote:
>
>> On Monday 27 February 2006 21:06, you wrote:
>>
>>  
>>
>>> Your proposal sounds very complex to me
>>> (e.g. a complete new mechanism of version controlling labels),
>>> and seems only duplicating existing functionality,
>>> just to get a new user interface.
>>>     
>>
>>
>> Damn it is not complex. It is the existing functionality that is comlex.
>>
>>   
>
> Complex??  Can you figure out how your Windows Explorer shell or 
> KFMClient arrange their files/folders??  It's not more complex than that.
>
>> It as elegant as an assembler. Or FORTH (ever tried to read FORTH 
>> programs)?
>>
>> "One mechanism must fit all" leads to convolved systems that expose 
>> low level implementation details to implement necessary features at 
>> least somehow.
>>
>> Besides, you are wrong -- subversion has several mechanisms, say 
>> files and properties. You probably will not argue that Subversion's 
>> versioning of properties is unnecessary since everything can be 
>> stored in a file?
>>
>>   
>
> File versioning needs to be separate from property versioning.  The 
> properties tell the system how to manage the file or describe it a bit 
> more.  The actual content of the file could be anything from the 
> super-secret code for nuclear weapons to my grandmothers chocolate 
> chip cookie recipe.  It's immaterial to the properties.  I would want 
> to see when someone changed the properties on either file, separate 
> from the content.
>
> my 2 cents.
>
> Regards,
> Frank
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
>
Just wanted to throw-in that I recently read an article about ReiserFS 
which mentioned doing precisely that: keeping file properties in the 
same namespace as file names. For example: ~/fooproj/foo.c/owner would 
contain the UID of the user that owns the file. Personally, I thought 
this was a wonderful idea.
Ah, found it:
http://kerneltrap.org/node/5654

I always like reading about ReiserFS.
Anyway, this is just to dismiss entirely those who would say "svn keeps 
seperate namespaces for properties and files, and you wouldnt want it 
any other way, right?" 'cause I really dont see why it shouldnt be 
another way anyway :)

Note: I am not advocating changing the way svn currently handles things, 
I just dont see anything /wrong/ with doing it differently. [shell 
expansion issues aside]

I have marked this message as "Off-Topic" in the subject-line. Please 
treat the message accordingly (dont want to spawn a huge sub-thread here)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org