Dear Matthias,
> You don't want to see the problem. What if you would have two sections
> on the web site? E.g.
>
<snip>
Well, it is not my site and out of my control. Besides, I believe it is the
way it is for quite a while now and never had any troubles before seems.
More over - I think (my personal opinion) that cvs mailing list is a proper
list, since the maintainers and users of the WinCvs are reading it and
responding here.
It is also our forum and don't you dare to say it's not.
> Ok, I got the same result. I read what CVS is replying to me: "...
> please specify one". I understood what I just read. I thought, "Ok, then
> I specify one."
<snip>
Why multiple revisions are locked, and why I have to know the revisions to
unlock them and where did you read which revisions are locked? I didn't lock
multiple revisions, right? So I have to issue two unlock commands to remove
a single lock? And that is OK? Well, I call it a BUG.
> Apart from this I get the behaviour which is described in the
> Cederqvist, which is what I expect CVS to do. I lock revisions on
> branches. Only the specified revisions of the file is locked. Commits to
> the main trunk or other branches, revisions are allowed.
>
> So -> no problem.
No way - if you lock one branch then other user can not commit to the trunk
or other branch. That is the reality.
For example, I have a branch checked out, the current revision is 1.24.2.1:
cvs -z8 admin -l ReadMe.txt (in directory
D:\roadmap\applications\10-stm\dev\adhocstm\ocx\)
RCS file:
/disk3/cvsroot/roadmap/applications/10-stm/dev/adhocstm/ocx/ReadMe.txt,v
1.24 locked
done
Why 1.24 on the main trunk is locked is a mistery to me thought...
Even if I try to specify the revision - it always locks the main trunk...
How did you, in that situation, managed to have the revision or branch
locked and commit to the trunk is an interesting question...
It is not working properly. Locks should work properly or it should be
removed all together. Keeping the current state is a fault and always a
source of confusion. And it defeats the concurency in the CVS and doesn't
look good at all. Pretending that problem is not existing is even worse. If
you don't like the feature then you don't use it and it's fine, but if the
feature is broken but you think it's OK because you don't use it then I just
can't find the words...
BR,
Jerzy
The first thing they don't teach you at school: "Never say never".
All the issues not related to the list please send to me in private, thanks.
