Hi Greg!

This sure sounds like a bug/oversight to me.

Greg McGary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Consider this scenario:
>
> * check-out or update to a branch "foo".
> * create a file, sticky tag is "foo".  Good.
> * remove a file, sticky tag remains "foo".  Good.
> * update to another branch tag with `-r bar', or back to trunk `-A'.
>   The added file and the removed file still have "foo" as their sticky
>   tags.  Bad.  (All other files have properly updated sticky tags)
>
> It smells like a bug, but I thought I'd see if there was some subtle,
> inscrutable reason why this behavior might be desirable.
>
> If it's a bug, I volunteer to fix it, since I need it done within a
> week.  8^)
>
> Some possible wrinkles:
>
> * removed file in old branch has different revision in new branch:
>   should treat as conflict
>
> * removed file in old branch has already been removed in new branch:
>   seems like a noop, and the removal should be considered already
>   complete.

I'm not sure I like the idea of losing the `locally removed' mark,
but I suppose doing as you suggest is consistent with e.g., how
a merge works when merging in a change that's already present
in working sources.

> * file added to old branch already exists in new branch:
>   should treat as conflict (unless perhaps file content is identical,
>   in which case the addition should be considered already complete?)

I don't feel too strongly about it, but am inclined to say
it deserves a conflict even if they happen to be identical.

Jim

_______________________________________________
Bug-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs

Reply via email to