--- "Greg A. Woods" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [ On Monday, October 7, 2002 at 12:39:29 (-0400), Larry Jones wrote: ] > > Subject: Re: Tag locking change > > > > Paul Sander writes: > > > > > > Another serious issue is when someone commits while an rtag is in > > > progress, and the new data are erroneously tagged. > > > > Anyone who does an rtag without specifying an explicit revision to tag > > gets exactly what they deserve. > > This part I sort of agree with, though strictly to say such a thing > you'd have to force them to never tag against the head of a branch with > rtag.
If one wants to tag the latest on a branch, why should one have to create a workarea to do it? I have perl baseline script that automates tagging, one of the options is tagging the latest on a given branch. The script utilizes rtag,rdiff,rlog to get its job done, without creating a workarea. I say forgo efficiency for robustness and have rtag lock the entire repo. It looks like a delay versus unintended results sinario. If rtag can have an implicit timestamp (rtag without a -D option) of command invocation (mentioned in a previous post) when given a branch tag for the -r option to rtag, then it wouldn't matter which way the rtag locking worked. Mark __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
