Giovanni Bajo wrote:
Jeffrey A Law <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In fact, after the subversion conversion is over, we can "svn
delete" all those merging tags for good since they're there because
you can't delete them in CVS but we really don't need them anymore
(before anybody asks: "svn delet
Jeffrey A Law <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In fact, after the subversion conversion is over, we can "svn
>> delete" all those merging tags for good since they're there because
>> you can't delete them in CVS but we really don't need them anymore
>> (before anybody asks: "svn delete" keeps history
On Sat, 2005-10-22 at 03:25 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> Besides the fact that you must have used -N, remember that you don't need all
> those merging tags anymore (forever). You can either live with a single tag
> per
> branch which you move along, or don't use tags alone and use svnmerge.py (se
On Oct 21, 2005, at 5:38 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
You'll also get a much faster time if you moved the apple tags into a
subdir (probably a second).
Once we're converted, I'd propose to `cleanup' all the tags. We can
svn rm the really old ones, logically group them and so on...
You must ha
Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I did:
>
> svn co svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/tags
>
> in the hopes that I could just update it form time to time, and have
> a list of all tags, but... empty directory...
Besides the fact that you must have used -N, remember that you don't need all
thos
On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 15:38 -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> svn tag inspection:
>
> mrs $ time cvs log version.c | grep apple-gcc-52
> real0m3.640s
> user0m0.181s
> sys 0m0.037s
>
> mrs $ time svn ls svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/tags | grep -i apple-
> gcc-52
> real0m5.233s
> user
