Re: [Arx-users] How does tag work?

[Walter Landry]

Kevin Smith <address@hidden> wrote:
> Walter Landry wrote:
> > With the example you gave, you had a main "waldron" branch, with a
> > "initial" sub-branch.  If you want to tag a particular revision of
> > that as v0.0.1, then
> > 
> >   arx tag waldron.initial waldron.initial.v0.0.1
> 
> I think this would make an excellent example for the manual and --help 
> (with names changed, of course).
> 
>    arx tag myproduct.main myproduct.main.v0.0.1
> 
> You might also mention how it will show up under arx browse, since I 
> found it a bit jarring at first. I think I like it now, but am not certain.

How about this in the help string

--------------------------------------------------
address@hidden:~/testdir/testss/arx.2.1.98$ arx tag -H
Create symbolic name for a revision
usage: tag [options] source-revision tag-branch

 -L --log-file file            specify the name of the log-file
 -s log-message                use LOG-MESSAGE as the description

Create a revision which is equivalent to SOURCE-REVISION (plus a log entry).
Normally a tag is just a symbolic name for a revision, so you still need
access to the source revision in order to check out a tagged revision.

If neither a log file nor a log message is provided, a trivial log entry
is created.

As an example, suppose you had a branch "myproduct", and your marketing
experts wanted to name the next version "v0.0.1". Then 

  arx tag myproduct myproduct.v0.0.1

will create a revision that you can get with

  arx get myproduct.v0.0.1

Note that this is equivalent to a new branch, so it will show up
with "arx browse".
--------------------------------------------------

> I see that you are now recommending that people pass init-tree a simple 
> project name ("hello"). That's sure a huge improvement over arch!
> 
> > It is more like tag would become more powerful.  For simple cases, the
> > syntax is the same except the order is reversed
> > 
> >   arx aka foo.stable foo.main
> 
> Please keep a simple tag operation for those of us working on simple 
> projects.
> 
> > However, you can also lump more than one project into it
> > 
> >   arx aka foo.stable foo.main bar.main bar baz.main baz
> > 
> > Then if you ran
> > 
> >   arx get foo.stable foo
> > 
> > you would get a directory structure like this
> > 
> > foo         ----> Contains the project foo.main
> > foo/bar     ----> Contains the project bar.main
> > foo/baz     ----> Contains the project baz.main
> 
> Ok. That does look fairly cool. Not enough to mess up tag, but I can 
> definitely see some uses for it in a larger project.
> 
> Hm. If the first argument to tag was the tag name, and it defaulted to 
> the current branch, then the aka syntax above looks like it would work 
> for tag (and it does make sense as a "tag"), avoiding the need for yet 
> another command name:
> 
>    arx tag tag-name [branch1 [branch2 [...]]]

That would be a good default, but I still want to change the name.  If
I keep the name, people will assume that "tag" is the same thing as in
CVS.

Walter