"Henning P. Schmiedehausen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Daniel Rall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >I'd rather that these CVS keywords were left out. They make merging > >between branches a PITA. > > Hi, > > that's a little late now as we have them in all files. :-)
So we have a few already, big deal. I'm simply against adding more of them. > I consider them good, because the revisions show up in the Javadocs > which helps finding out what revision is documented in which > Javadocs. My experience with @version and @since tags has shown me that they are most useful when then point to a released version number. Now, I realize that releases have been few and far between in Turbine land, but that is not the direction which we'd like to continue in, is it? > I do hand-merging by doing "cvs export -r <revision> -kk <package>" > and then using emacs ediff mode which very much smoothes over this > problem and auto-merging using cvs update -j does the right thing > anyway. I use ediff as well when I have to, but prefer `cvs up -j` to merge between branches (the case where $Marker: $ tags is the biggest PITA). Remembering to add -kk is not something I like spending my time doing. > So I don't see a big problem here. Or did I misunderstand you? Your use case described hand merges. -k can be used with updates between branches, but I don't find that having the CVS revision number show up in the JavaDoc really adds enough value -- I prefer use of @since tags. -- Daniel Rall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
