Aaron Kaplan wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 10:25:49 +0200 (CEST), "Yann Dirson" said:
But in either case, I agree it is not trivial to do with only plain cvs.
That would surely be easier with cvsps.
I'm not sure the cvsps source is even supposed to work at this point.
My understanding is that the only reason the cvsps code is in there is
that the cvs classes are derived from it. I could be wrong.
Well, I guess it should be tested something more frequently than I do,
but it should work ok. The CVS subclass just reimplements a few methods.
I recall that I had problems with cvsps, when I started with cvsync:
from time to time (probably due to new branch creations, or something
wierd) the revid was not "constant" (in other words, what cvsps tagged
as "123" a week ago may be different from the changeset "123" of today).
Has anyone ever seen this, or is this fixed in current cvps?
It would have been smart to look at how cvsps dealt with tags before
writing the tag handling code for the cvs source, but I didn't, so I'm
not familiar with the funky/invalid classification you refer to. I'll
take a look.
I'm afraid the cvsps backend does not handle tags. I surely should spend
some time on that too, because I never got a precise idea of how tags
are currently handled :-) Maybe the behaviour should be abstracted a
little bit so that other backends could play the same game.
thank you,
bye, lele.
_______________________________________________
Tailor mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/tailor
