developingchris/roundhouse — comment on commit 7242df51b2cc970dd92b1e43ce22e1fcb804f4cc
File:  line 0
By developingchris:

Revision takes on a different meaning when you think of it like git, instead of like subversion though(a hash of the contents, not linear increments). You can move forward in time, but still move to the same revision as a previous moment in time. Which doesn't lend itself to this kind of versioning.

I see the beauty in it, and if you could have your rev in version control be respected by msbuild, the world would be a different place. But I actually like my chocolate and peanut butter seperate on this one. Build version, database version, and source control version. Are not the same things. In that branches will collide with each other. 2 branches may be completely different build numbers, that depend on the same revision of the database, but don't have the same version control revision, simply by the fact that they have 1 setting in a config file about the path of a custom error page. As much as it sounds like I'm making a contrived what if. This is really how I work a lot, on very small feature branches, where build rev bumps a lot, database changes happen sparingly and ultimately after a pretty solid rebase, 30 changesets become maybe 3. So tying the database to the assemblies, to the way I use sourcecontrol, constrains my ability to use git and mercurial to their fullest power.