--- Stephen Rasku <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 22:46:42 -0700 (PDT)
> >From: Stephen Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[...]
> >It seems to me that moving a branch tag is almost NEVER the
> >right thing to do, while moving a non-branch tag is a (comparatively)
> >normal operation...
> >
>
> I quite often move branch tags. Usually, I only do this when there is
> no development on that branch for that file. This allows me to keep
> up with the current development without creating multiple branches. I
> just move the branch tag up to the tip revision, do "cvs update" and I
> am back to the latest and greatest.
[...]
And how is it that you move a branch tag?
If you were to naively attempt it with something like this:
cvs update -A somefile
cvs tag -F branchtag somefile
Well, guess what... You just converted "branchtag" from being
a branch tag into being a regular tag. Not only that,
but now you have NO idea what revision "branchtag" used
to point to, and no way to find out, so you can't even
undo it. So, to refine my suggestion, perhaps "cvs tag -F branchtag"
should balk at converting a branchtag to a non-branch tag
without some explicit instructions to do so. I suppose,
if it's normal practice to move branchtags around, (seems
odd to me) then "cvs tag -F -b branchtag file" should be
tolerable. Perhaps the problem stems from "-F" meaning
"Force", thus allowing all sorts of questionable things to
be justified as part of "cvs tag -F" and overloading of "-F"
to move a normal tag, which is a fairly common operation that
seems like it should not require a mnemonically drastic-sounding
option such as "-F". Just a few thoughts.
--steve
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail � Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
