Yes, once one goes to more advanced features (like branches and tags), it becomes harder to find or agree on common link types. Note that RFC-3253 defines a full versioning protocol, including branches (called "activities") and tags (called "baselines). Cheers, Geoff Julian Reschke wrote on 11/26/2009 10:58:37 AM: > Sam Johnston wrote: > ... > > I also wonder whether it makes sense to offer links to "native" revision > > control (e.g. hg, git, svn, etc.) and/or web interfaces to them - and > > then specifics like branches and tags, and what a URI/URL to a > > branch/tag would even look like. > > That's an interesting thought, but appears to be a much more complex > problem that the one we wanted to solve here. > > Best regards, Julian >
Received on Thursday, 26 November 2009 16:10:26 UTC