On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Noel Yap wrote: > --- Kaz Kylheku <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Using the sticky tag would be unsatisfactory in the > > case that it's a > > branch tag, because you would be annotating from the > > branch tip.
[ snip ] > I don't understand. > > Currently (from what I'm seeing), "cvs ann" will > annotate the head revision on the trunk, regardless of > the working revision. Right; we both agree that this is unsatisfactory. > Unless our definitions of "Sticky Tag" differ, it > sounds like we agree on what "cvs ann" /should/ do. ``Working revision'' and ``sticky tag'' are different. There can be a sticky tag ``release_branch'', the working revision can be 1.8.2.1, and there can be a new revision 1.8.2.2 in the repository. I'd want cvs annotate to consider only 1.8.2.1 and its ancestors, but if it were to use the sticky branch tag ``release_branch'' it would include the new revision 1.8.2.2. So in other words, I'd want it to ignore the sticky tag, and just use the revision number 1.8.2.1 found in CVS/Entries. In fact, is there a a reason why any operations other than update, commit, add and remove should care about sticky tags? Which ones? -- Meta-CVS: solid version control tool with directory structure versioning. http://users.footprints.net/~kaz/mcvs.html http://freshmeat.net/projects/mcvs _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
