On Wednesday 02 March 2005 17:18, Derek Price wrote: > Frank Hemer wrote: > | On Wednesday 02 March 2005 08:11, Mark D. Baushke wrote: > |> Hi Frank, > |> > |> I am looking forward to your feature... > |> > | :-) > > I'm looking forward to this too. I just have one quibble, with your > usage of ".root". The CVS manual and other sources use "root" to > refer to what you are referring to as the "origin" of a branch. The > logic being that a branch is always "rooted" in another branch, so the > "root" refers to the revision actually on the parent branch. > > I'm not sure what I would recommend in place of what you are calling > the "root", but I would like to see ".root" refer to the revision on > the parent branch.
Not a problem, its just a #define. However I didn't have a better idea. Using .base instead can be similar miss-interpreted since there is BASE. How about replacing '.root' with '.tail', and replacing '.origin' with '.root'? > The rest of your design looks great so far! :-) Regards, Frank -- - The LinCVS Team - http:/www.lincvs.com _______________________________________________ Bug-cvs mailing list Bug-cvs@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs
