On Mon, 21 Jun 1999, Nate Williams wrote:
> > > > I notice that in the last 6 months a change has occurred in how we use
> > > > our cvs tools, in that there's a great increase in the usage of tags.
> >
> > Would you mind giving one example where not having tags hurt us?
>
>
> Sure. When multiple developers are trying to work together as well as
> track -current, everything has to be done by hand. Case in point is the
> work that the VM guys want to do. It would be alot easier for both the
> developers *AND* the testers to share code this way. This also makes it
> much easier for the developer to 'merge' in changes made to the main
> branch, rather than having to hand-merge it in everytime, build diffs,
> and re-distribute them.
>
> The other developers then need to back-out the original diffs, re-apply
> the new diffs, which is alot more work. With CVS, this is done *ONCE*
> for each change (by CVS), hence the amount of work to help out is much
> less.
>
> What 'cheaper' way could this kind of easy integration be done, short of
> using the 'magic' branch tags in the FreeBSD CVS version that I don't if
> anyone has ever used because I don't think anyone knows exactly if it
> works, and how to make it work.
OK, now I see the light. I've had a lot of people responding, but all
the other responses could be covered by the use of date checkouts. This
makes sense.
I get very stubborn when I'm given (what appears to me to be) a bogus
argument, even if the ultimate conclusion is right. The reason given
for the conclusion has to hold water.
>
>
>
> Nate
>
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | communications topic, C programming, and Unix.
213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 |
Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run picnic and jaunt, both FreeBSD-current.
(301) 220-2114 |
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
