There is also the theoretical issue of multiple developers committing changes to the same set of multiple files at once, which does rather worry me.
In an ideal world, one of those developers should get all his files committed, and the others should be locked out. But without transactional commits, you can't guarantee that. Of course, the chances of this causing a problem in a genuine development environment, are a completely seperate question... On 08/09/05, Mateusz [PEYN] Adamus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stuart Cooper napisał(a): > > It would be a ridiculous feature, which would overcomplicate the > > implementation and confuse users. > > Strange I'm a user of CVS too and it wouldn't confuse me. > > > CVS is a Version Control System, so you can undo bad checkins > > and remove branches manually and things like that. So there's > > already revert your unwanted changes functionality there. > > Right, there are. But one additional feature which would automate this > would be great. No mess, no stress. > > > best regards > Mateusz [PEYN] Adamus > _______________________________________________ > Info-cvs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs >
_______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
