[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       fossil-users
Subject:    Re: [fossil-users] branch ID as well as branch name
From:       Ron W <ronw.mrmx () gmail ! com>
Date:       2014-10-24 0:12:43
Message-ID: CAHWyCX5Y6j9PxXV11X_kMjRp23eR+8LDTLeeLZpHS+dAFpSo9w () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

FWIW, in the SVN vs Git community, neither side understands the other
side's rational about even the just tracking branch metadata, let alone
naming branches. The SVN people thought branch IDs were not sufficient. The
Git people say there is no value in tracking branch metadata  So much for
trying to offer "best of both worlds".

On the other hand, the SVN people like that Fossil has named branches and
full branch metadata tracking. some even liked the idea of renaming
branches.

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>FWIW, in the \
SVN vs Git community, neither side understands the other side&#39;s rational about \
even the just tracking branch metadata, let alone naming branches. The SVN people \
thought branch IDs were not sufficient. The Git people say there is no value in \
tracking branch metadata   So much for trying to offer &quot;best of both \
worlds&quot;.</div><div><br></div><div>On the other hand, the SVN people like that \
Fossil has named branches and full branch metadata tracking. some even liked the idea \
of renaming branches.</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]