Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: UI change proposal: *-tag -> *->id

[Robert Anderson]

On Fri, 2003-09-19 at 06:59, Bruce Stephens wrote:
> Zack Brown <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > In this case I think deviating from CVS is probably better. CVS
> > never got branching right, and that's one of the things tla is
> > really good at.  At the same time, "tagging" a file to have a
> > particular string at the end makes perfect sense. "tagging" a
> > category to a new archive is much less intuitive.
> 
> Probably all true.  That suggests removing "tla tag", and replacing it
> with "tla branch".

This is a replay of many previous discussions.  "branch" is probably not
entirely suitable either, because the usage _can_ conform to what people
think of as a branch, but it can also be used in other ways, as in
creating a "tag version."  That's a lot more like a CVS tag, again.

I find myself telling people to think of a tag as a symbolic link.  What
do people think of:

tla link

That seems to fit intuitively to all use cases, to me.

Bob