Robert Collins wrote: > Max Bowsher wrote: >> The setup-200303 branch tag has been inadvertantly moved, leaving the >> original branch untagged and inaccessible, and also giving rise to the >> insanely long version number assigned to the current setup snapshot. >> >> I've inspected the RCS files, and can restore the setup-200303 to it's >> correct location - but I will need to directly edit the RCS files. >> (Obviously I will do a test run on a local copy of the repository first). >> >> Advantages: >> * Repository would be less confusing to someone inspecting it at a later >> date. >> * We can have a less silly version number for our next release setup. >> * Simple tidyness. >> >> Disadvantages: >> * I'll need to lock the relevant directories (setup and libgetopt++) for >> about 15 minutes >> >> >> Comments? > > Go for it. I didn't realise CVS was so broken.
Forgot to say in my last email: Do you recall the command you ran that caused this? Presumably something like "cvs (r)tag -F". Or was it a script that went wrong? I see some instances of cvs rtag -F in maint/cvsmerge. Did you use that script? Max.
