This is intentional by CVS. So here's the scenario Person1 & Person2 working on file1.c and hence have a copy of the file in their respective sandbox.
Person1 checks-in file1.c, updating the repository copy. Person2 checks in file1.c, CVS complains "Your file is out of date" (or the like). Person2 has to do a "cvs up" first to get Person1's changes in his sandbox copy; then Person2 can commit. Without this check, Person2 will overwrite Person1's changes. -chris >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >] On Behalf Of Matthias Kaeppler >Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 12:51 PM >To: info-cvs@gnu.org >Subject: Working on sources in parallel > > >Hello, > >just recently we had the problem that two people had checked out the >same module and were working on it independently. When the second one >committed his sources again, CVS reported an error (I can't >reproduce it >100% here, sorry) about the sources not being up-to-date. > >However, I thought that would be exactly what CVS takes care >of, in fact >making sure that noone has to bother about who else has checked out a >version and modifies it, and merges all changes together when >committing >it back. > >I haven't seen anything about this issue in the info pages either. > >Am I missing something? > >-- >Matthias Kaeppler _______________________________________________ >Info-cvs mailing list >Info-cvs@gnu.org >http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs > _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list Info-cvs@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
