> Question is, how much of a performance hit would this > extra step be? This could be called explicitly (by an extra flag), thus normal performance is not affected. And when specified for a large tree would speeded the update process (the files that share the TAG would not have to be redownloaded now, but just have the keywords updated).
> Note, by the way, that the "Sticky tag:" line in 'cvs stat' reads info > from CVS/Entries, not from the RCS keywords. It would be nice if CVS/Entries would store if a file has keyword or not, then the scanning would only be performed on a handful of files. Thanks, Igor _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
