What arguments exist against keyword substitution as a feature in version control systems? [closed]

Question

Are there any arguments out there against keyword substitution (i.e. replacing $Revision$ with $Revision: 5$) as a feature in version control systems?

I'm not looking for a debate. I'm looking for well thought-out arguments by people who think the feature is a bad idea.

Here is one such argument:

• Keyword Substition: Why You Don't Need It

It's succinct, and I think the argument about the problems it causes for binary files is cogent, but I don't find it compelling.

Again, I'm not interested in a debate, just good arguments agains the feature. I can make up my own mind, but want to have good data with which to do so.

Answer 1

I'll admit that it's been very many years since I used keyword substitution in a version control system.

The really hard one to justify is $Log$. It seems like a good idea at first, but after a short while it really starts to clutter up the source. The information is easily available from the version control system when needed, so having it in the file is redundant.