Re: New names for VC local version backups

[Kai Großjoha nn]

On 25 Oct 2000, Andre Spiegel wrote:

> Hmm, this doesn't appeal to me.  It would result in an explosion of
> subdirectories under `versions'.  It would be difficult to find a
> version of a particular file if you don't happen to know the version
> number.  Completely unrelated files would end up in the same
> subdirectory only because they happen to have the same version
> number.

The obvious alternative is to use versions/foo.c/1.42.  Yet nobody
mentioned it.  Is it bad for some obvious reason, and I'm just failing
to see it?

kai
-- 
I like BOTH kinds of music.