On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 08:46:16PM +0100, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Donald Sharp wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 08:37:38PM +0100, Julian Seward wrote: > > > > > > Now what we want to do is to throw away, in effect, the current HEAD > > > and turn the interesting ERASER branch into the HEAD. > > > > Why not just merge the changes on branch ERASER into main? > > Several new files and directories have been added; this complicates > things but may not make it impossible. Also, I don't think the ERASER > logs will become part of HEAD, will they?
Nope but you can just follow the log trails yourself with one more step.. > > > In the end what difference does it truly matter what branch > > you develop on? > > HEAD is more convenient in general (no -r tags, etc). More importantly, > we want to restructure the repository significantly. Doing that on the > ERASER branch is No Fun At All, because many of the files don't even exist > in HEAD, and thus live in Attic/ directories. Remember restructuring may prevent you from ever going back to a previous version. Have you looked at the admin -b<branch> command? I've never used it, so I would highly suggest you create a test repository and see how it truly works( if at all )... donald > > -- > Nick Nethercote > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
