-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all,
I'm just reading the wiki article at http://ximbiot.com/cvs/wiki/index.php?title=GPG-Signed_Commits and I'm worried that the proposed naming convention allows for ambiguity. If it will be .#filename.revision, won't cvs get confused when $filename ends in something that looks like a revision number? Suppose I have two files in revision control, foo, and foo.1.2 (silly and contrived, but possible, and somehow windows users have a knack for wanting these weird things). Let's also say I want to check out "foo" on a branch, 1.2.1, so the base file would be .#foo.1.2.1.1, and I want some random revision of foo.1.2 on HEAD, and it happens to be 1.1 that I want, so its base file will be .#foo.1.2.1.1. See the problem? Thumbsuck solution: .#filename#.revision; since $revision may never contain '#', this disambiguates the encoding. The example above would then have base files .#foo.1.2#.1.1 and .#foo#.1.2.1.1. - -- I have neither the need, the time, or the inclination to put words into your mouth. You are perfectly capable of damaging your reputation without any help from me. --Richard Heathfield roasts a troll in comp.lang.c -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Please fetch my new key 804177F8 from hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net/ iD8DBQFEYJiOwyMv24BBd/gRAqKCAKCPEnNAmMW5myfb+USDfCzm0+EEqwCgjUJR fwY12NCYvnS8LLz32fU5eLw= =B9Gf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Bug-cvs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs
