> > >> Well, that's a fair argument, but why don't you get Marc to set
> > >> up nightly snapshots for the WIN32_DEV branch? That only costs
> > >> cycles in the short term. Polluting CVS with updates to
> > >> derived files will cost us CVS storage forever.
> >
> > > Um, why not just have someone with local CVSROOT access just rm
> > > -f the ,v file when the WIN32_DEV branch ceases to be useful?
> >
> > If we do that, we will lose the change histories from back when
> > those files were kept in CVS (five or more years ago). Perhaps
> > this is not important, but I'm hesitant to do it.
That's right... those files used to be in CVS...
> Right. I assume branches are kept in the same file as HEAD.
Correct, CVS abuses the RCS format.
> I have decided not to regularly update the derived files in
> WIN32_DEV --- I will just keep the files in their place, and have
> configure 'touch' them to make them more recent when configure is
> run --- we are just trying to get the backend to start at this
> point.
*shrug* It's just an RCS file and easily editable by those who have
write access. As I said, just a thought and is something that's
pretty common for FreeBSD's CVS meisters to do and shouldn't be an
option that this project rules out.
--
Sean Chittenden
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
