[ On Wednesday, February 16, 2000 at 17:48:38 (-0800), |}avid (opeland wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Why does CVS treat removed files so specially?
>
> The problem occurs when doing more sophisticated developemnt. We have
> essentially 5 layers - 1 where developers work, 1 where files are merged and
> assembled for QA, 1 where QA happens, 1 where the client approves changes and 1
> for the live site. This means 3 or 4 tags are needed (dev,qa,stage,live, dev
> could be omitted).
You need to use branches instead of plain tags.
Normal tags point at fixed releases, i.e. the set of revisions of each
file that was current when the tag was applied (or essentially that).
Branches allow lines of development, which is essentially what you seen
to be trying to do.
Read this: <URL:http://www.enteract.com/~bradapp/acme/branching/>
> The overall point is that I see no advantage to the current implementation and
> it actually makes doing certain things with CVS very difficult. It would be
> nice to know the reason why it acts this way, and if there is a problem with
> providing a flag to do the behaviour I describe.
The "death" support in CVS solves two very critical problems that cannot
be solved without it in some form: (1) handling file resurrection
properly; and (2) handling the sparse addition of files on only some
branches.
Turning off the file "death" feature would have to be a compile-time
flag that was restricted to a given repository where the "normal" CVS
could never be used. Ideally it would also disable branching support.
However making such a change to CVS would not be easy and the result
would not be maintainable at all.
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Secrets of the Weird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
