Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 18:00:08 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: phk@critter.tfs.com (Poul-Henning Kamp) Cc: nate@sri.MT.net, paul@netcraft.co.uk, freebsd-current@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: sup/cvs tags Message-ID: <199604070100.SAA28828@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <4585.828823637@critter.tfs.com> from "Poul-Henning Kamp" at Apr 6, 96 08:47:17 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > I agree. The FreeBSD cvs tree isn't for personal development and I'm > > > a bit miffed that Garret has been allowed to get away with putting in > > > a personal tag. > > > > I disagree. I think we don't use the full capabilities of CVS, and just > > because it might be painful for folks on slow links (and *NO* one has a > > Maybe the right thing to do would be to make a branch for all core-members > (and other significant developers) once and for all... What's needed is the ability to locally branch so that you can continue to recieve changes on the main source branch and still use local version control. This means that people like me can run under local source control with multiple seperately committable projects and still end up with combined sources for our own local builds. The problem here is the transport mechanism would need to be able to be flagged to list the branches to be transported. Neither SUP nor CTM are up to this job. Specifically, Garrett adding his tag would not affect you because unless you asked for his tagged branch, you'd only get the common source base in any case. THis would allow using the CVS tree for multiple combined projects that don't impact non-participants. If you aren't willing to fix the CVS, then you need to do what I do: lump it. I currently keep a difficult-to-maintain environment and my patches are submitted in difficult-to-piece-out form because I can't maintain local seperate and combined trees based on branch tags and branch merge on checkout. If you get large updates when a necessary tag goes in, live with it or fix CVS so you don't have to suffer as a result. But don't try and say "the tag should not go in because it is not convenient". Life is inconvenient. Deal with it. As to the idea of creating a branch for each core member and other significant developers, it doesn't deal with: 1) people without commit priviledges 2) developers with commit priveledges with multiple irons in the fire. I don't think the idea will result what you obviously intend: taking a large hit once to avoid taking future hits. Garrett's tag is not "garrett"... it is descriptive of the subproject. You could not reliably predict the names of all future subprojects and precreate them to save taking the hits. Say "oh well". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604070100.SAA28828>