Updated tags support

[Johan Rydberg]

"Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd at over-yonder.net> writes:

>> > In the short term, yes "in the Branch" is correct. I would like to
>> > open it up for discussion whether tags are branch local, or could
>> > be considered shared between branches.
>> 
>> Hmm.  Maybe we need to be very specific here, because there are two
>> possible meanings of 'shared'.
>> 
>> 1. The current set of tags is shared among all branches
>
> I would tend toward this, as far as possible.  [...]

I guess that you want tags to be shared between all _related_
branches?  After splitting the (working-dir, branch, repo) tuple,
several unrelated branches may populate the same repo.

Another issue; should a tag always be available in the revision it
points out?  In other words; should tag FOO, that is a symbolic name
for revision BAR, be present after a "bzr branch -r FOO foo"?

>From my point of view, the obvious answer is "yes".  But it is far
from obvious when it comes to the implementation.  (I have to verify
this but) I think suggested implementation makes tags present from the
revision that introduced the tag, not the revision the tag points to.
Take the following example:

   (hack/commit * N)
   $ bzr revno
   25
   $ bzr set-tag -r 10 foo-tag 
   $ bzr commit -m "set foo-tag"
   $ bzr branch . -r tag:foo-tag bar

Should 'bar' know about foo-tag?

~j