> From: Greg Stein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 26 September 2001 09:35
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 05:45:40PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote: > > On Tuesday 25 September 2001 04:13 pm, Graham Leggett wrote: > >... > > > Right now, what is the best way of returning mod_proxy to the tree? Is > > > it > > > > > > a) checking in the latest copy of proxy, relying on the old > httpd-proxy > > > tree for history. > > > b) moving the ,v files across so that history is carried forward into > > > httpd-2.0 tree? > > > > B. That history is incredibly important since proxy is > basically a complete > > re-write for 2.0. > > > > Of course, Greg is likely to disagree with me (this is one of > our long-standing > > disagreements), so wait for him to respond too, please. > > Thanks for the consideration, Ryan... > > Well, an import is a bit different than moving files around in the tree. I > tend to advocate "cvs add" for moving files, rather than mucking with ,v > files. Moving or copying ,v files means that files can appear > when you check > out old copies (by tag if you don't remove them, but a > checkout-by-date will > always produce spurious files). [ Greg explains ... ] > > Are we having fun yet? :-) > > Cheers, > -g Well, I don't know for sure, but there might be another option that doesn't involve too much work. In CVSROOT/modules do this: httpd-2.0 httpd-2.0 &httpd-2.0/modules/proxy httpd-2.0/modules/proxy -d modules/proxy httpd-proxy/module-2.0 But then again, this might just be a bit to little. Oh well, just a thought, Sander
