[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: import inconsistency

From: Derek Robert Price
Subject: Re: import inconsistency
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 10:36:52 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02

Max Bowsher wrote:

Paul Edwards wrote:
Strange Thing 3: People are perplexed why you don't use the
Attic, while as far as you can tell, you've set everything up in
the most logical manner possible.

Your method probably is the most logical for the situation, but you are
still using vendor branches in a way they were not originally intended for.

Now, there may possibly be a way to make vendor branches work better in your
use case, but I've missed any possible discussion on this because it has
been swamped under all the head/Attic traffic.

I was going to bring that up. It might make sense to redesign the vendor branch system to accomodate such a complex process, but why not just do your first import, branch _that_, and merge future imports like they came off any other branch? Is there any reason in your process to require the vendor branch, intended as a base for the trunk, other than the ease of typing a `cvs import' command?



Email: derek@ximbiot.com

Get CVS support at <http://ximbiot.com>!
"Thank GOD Microsoft doesn't build airplanes."

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]