[ On Friday, February 22, 2002 at 01:48:50 (-0800), Paul Sander wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: CVS Update Behaviour
>
> I've done it the "CVS way", actually I've done it in several of the
> "CVS ways" as documented in the manual.
Only one of the ways documented in the manual even comes close to being
the one correct way to do file renames. The other two ways have fatal
flaws in a number of situations. I've posted updates to the manual
which correct the documentation.
> Rather than argue for the sake of arguing, I suggest that you try a
> system that has such a mechanism. Apply it to a non-trivial project,
> and try making fundamental changes to the layout of the sources. A
> Unix kernel with its drivers might be a good sample. Then try merging
> changes across branches.
I don't need to use any such over-burdened fancy system. I'm extremely
happy with the way things work now in CVS -- there's more than adequate
support for tracking renames across history, at least form the point of
view of anyone actually needing the revision history and commit logs and
not just arguing about a mythical need.
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Planix, Inc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
