[Lazarus] revision numbers of each SVN tag?

[Marco van de Voort]

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:35:40PM +0200, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
> >> Yes, but beware the some of them got merges from trunk afterwards.
> >>
> >> For instance, lazarus_0_9_26_2 is based on 18716, and r18269 got merged
> >>  resulting in r18898. So you cannot simpy use r18898 for the tag.
> > 
> > I noticed that...  Doesn't that defeat the point of tags???  Branches
> > are used for merging things. Tags should be set in stone - a snapshot
> > at a specific point in time.
> 
> I'll second that.
> 
> Later fixes should be supplied as patches (AKA "service packs"), IMO.

And deliver and maintain a patch infrastructure for end users? Brrr.

I agree with Vincent that an ideal case would be to hide/unhide tags, so
that they are only publically visible after finalization. But it remains
only a tool, and such minor details shouldn't be exaggerated.

Moreover, I've a feeling that both Graeme and you are reasoning from a very
centralized model, where one person is responsible for a branch, and often
controls the total flow of patches over that branch. (like Linus, Andrew and
the rest in Linux)

FPC and Lazarus are not organized that way. A tool should match
organization, not the other way around.