Lele Gaifax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>>>> "Bruce" == Bruce Stephens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...] > Bruce> So that's what I did. I was only using the result in trac, > Bruce> so I didn't notice that it doesn't do what I expected. > Bruce> Instead, it gets all changes since that date, regardless of > Bruce> branch, which is logical I guess, although I'm not sure it > Bruce> would make a useful repository. > > Surely not, but that's definitely *not* what tailor was born for. I'm converting a few months of our CVS repository to subversion, to use in trac (which everyone finds handy: we could use cvstrac, I guess), which I'll continue to keep up to date using tailor. I also intend to do the same thing on the resulting subversion repository (probably into monotone), which I'll actually use for developing. I'll be using tailor one-way: I'll use the monotone (or subversion, or whatever) SCM to produce patches which I'll commit using CVS. So that's not ideal, because there's a danger of conflicts and so on. However, we use scripts around CVS, so doing anything more two-way would be more work than I want to bother with (that's also a reason I don't want to bother with cvstrac: I'd have to teach that something about the way our scripts work so it knows what changes are in a changeset). (One day we'll migrate to something better. Sadly, not darcs, which seems to me to match our workflow best; darcs just seems too slow for the size of our working copies.) I think I'm using tailor much as it's intended to be used? (Once upon a time I had thoughts of actually converting our repository, but I gave that idea up some time ago.) [...] _______________________________________________ Tailor mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/tailor
