Sergei Organov wrote: > > Todd Denniston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > If "cvs -n commit" runs the triggers to do your check(see my question > > above), I have another question: in a remote server setup (i.e., :pserver:, > > :ext:) which test was failed, the add or the normal commit? > > With my approach there is no add-to-working-copy-time triggers, adding of a > new > file is normal commit (the commit time trigger should have a way to check > if the file is already in the repository or not). So your question > reduces to the following: "how client knows what exactly failed?" and > the answer is "through appropriate error message, as usual". > > Please notice that with separate add-to-working-copy-time triggers the > situation at commit time is exactly the same as those triggers must be > run at commit time anyway. What's an answer to your question in this > case? There is a certain amount beauty in the simplicity in keeping the status quo, which works. :) There is also beauty in having the options you want, and none that get in other peoples way. For one of these options much more energy must be expended. :)
-- Todd Denniston Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC Crane) Harnessing the Power of Technology for the Warfighter _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list Info-cvs@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
