Date: Sat, 29 Apr 1995 04:46:02 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Mike Pritchard <mpp@mpp.com> Cc: rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com (Rodney W. Grimes), phk@freefall.cdrom.com, CVS-commiters@freefall.cdrom.com, cvs-user@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/release/libdisk disk.c libdisk.h tst01.c Message-ID: <13861.799155962@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 29 Apr 1995 05:24:42 CDT." <199504291024.FAA03408@mpp.com>
Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
> I've seen too much stuff lately that had comments like: > > rev 1.0 Initial checkin.... > > a little bit latter: rev 1.1 fix some typos/do some cleanup/etc... Careful! Sometimes that's done very deliberately, as I've done for a couple of things lately (like libftp or mkisofs). The point is that you commit the unchanged sources FIRST, then you apply your FreeBSD specific changes in a second pass. Why? So that you can bring in the next version of whatever external package it was when the author releases it again and apply their changes against the ORIGINAL sources you got from them last time. This also makes it a heck of a lot easier to send the changes back since if the author suddently resurfaces from Tahiti someplace and says "What have you done to my sources??", you can easily create a diff for them that shows all the local changes done from the last time you syncronized with them. > That type of stuff should have been done before the initial checkin. Nope, not always. Go back to your seat, Mr. Pritchard, and stop disrupting the class! :-) Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?13861.799155962>