Endre St�lsvik wrote: >On Thu, 2 May 2002, Paul Spencer wrote: > >| David, >| How does a cvs update behave when the directory is deleted from the CVS, >| but not you local copy? >| >| Paul Spencer > >You will get question marks, or problems with the CVS directory at your >copy referring to the directory, which no longer is present. I usually >just edit the Entries file inside the containing dir's CVS dir if I get >problems, but there are probably "correct" ways of doing this. > >But, WHY do you folks do this? Why not just delete (cvs rm) the files, as >"one are supposed to do"? Then they move into Attic, and you won't see >them again, but they can still be checked out.. > > You still get all the empty directories in the initial checkout of the repository.
>Deleting stuff and messing around in the cvs dir structure breaks ALL >tags, branches and dated checkouts and stuff like this. It is often better >(as far as I know) to make a new CVS tree, delete all the CVS dirs from >your local copy, and import the new stash into the new CVS, thus having >the possibility to check out older versions. > >But is that really necessary? > > > I would personally prefer to actually re-import the whole CVS tree (that would effectively clear all the versions and tags) and keep the old repository in an archive to let people search for older revisions. If this does not seem to create consensus, I'll try to see what can be done to prune manually the current repository of the oldest directories (some of them have not been used for more than 2 years...). As far as I understand the different needs, we just need to be sure that it's still possible to retrieve all the versions up to 1.2b1. -- Rapha�l Luta - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Professional Services Manager Vivendi Universal Networks - Paris -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
