Christian Stimming wrote: > Quoting Chris Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>>> Log: >>>> Tagging the 2.1.0 release of GnuCash >>>> >>>> Copied: gnucash/tags/2.1.0 (from rev 15912, gnucash/trunk) >>> >>> Wouldn't it make more sense if we tagged the revision that was >>> released? I'm not sure which revision that actually was, but it seems >>> like it might have been close to 15894. >>> >> It was 15892, hmm I thought that's what I did as I didnt update my tree >> when I tagged it. Damm :-( > > I suppose the command that you used was "svn copy svn+ssh://..../trunk > ...../tags/2.1.0"? In that case this would use trunk's latest > revision, regardless of your current working copy's revision. The > command for tagging a specific revision (according to Derek, > http://lists.gnucash.org/logs/2007-04-16.html#T18:04:17 ) would be > "svn copy svn+ssh://...../[EMAIL PROTECTED] .....tags/2.1.0". Just for the > record :-) > > Christian > Actually that didnt work. The correct syntax was svn copy -r 15892 svn+ssh://
Chris _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
