Donald Sharp wrote:
> Here are some sample cvs history -T output(s):
>
> T 2000-11-29 15:21 +0000 sharpd bar.c 1.3 [d:A]
> T 2000-11-29 15:21 +0000 sharpd foo.c 1.1 [d:A]
> T 2000-11-29 15:21 +0000 sharpd bar.c 1.4 [b:M]
> T 2000-11-29 15:22 +0000 sharpd bar.c [b:D]
> T 2000-11-29 15:22 +0000 sharpd foo.c [b:D]
>
> Is this ok? What do people think?
Oh, and you should come up with a new record type besides 'T' so that histories
won't have to be reset once this change goes in and scripts will be able to easily
distinguish between an old record type and a new one without counting fields.
Derek
--
Derek Price CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org )
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenAvenue ( http://OpenAvenue.com )
--
116. (A)bort, (R)etry, (P)retend this never happened...
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
