[Top][All Lists]

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

[patch #4573] Fix for keyword expansion problem/mis-feature during commi

From: Derek Robert Price
Subject: [patch #4573] Fix for keyword expansion problem/mis-feature during commit
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 04:40:16 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 Fedora/1.0.7-1.1.fc4 Firefox/1.0.7

Follow-up Comment #10, patch #4573 (project cvs):

Except that this is not a bug.  CVS is working as designed.  One of the
primary design goals of all CVS development is to NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER,
EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER, throw away data.  Even when merging local
changes with changes from the server, CVS first creates a permanent backup
file before editing changes into the local copy.

You are proposing that when a user has intentionally modified a file, CVS
should intentionally not only ignore the user's change, but overwrite it on
the next update.  This goes against most everything else CVS tries to do.

The alternative, the current behavior and status quo, is that the change be
checked into the repository before the local version is rewritten.  Thus, if
the user decides they are upset about losing the data, they can get it back
and presumably do something to protect it from future keyword substitutions. 
If they are not upset about losing the data, then they can presumably refrain
from making changes inside keyword values in the future.

In addition, what you are defining as a "bug" only occurs when EITHER users
are unaware of how CVS expands keywords OR when the keyword mode is set
improperly for a file.  I would define this, rather, as "user error", or a
management/training issue.  Either way problems can be fixed quickly and
users educated when necessary, as noted above.

Perhaps a patch to, instead, set the default keyword mode for a repository or
project to something other than "-kkv" would be a reasonable compromise?  Such
a config key could hopefully be processed at the time of commit of a newly
added file.  Not that I have time to write this, but I am willing to discuss
it and perhaps apply a complete patch submission if there are no objections.


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Savannah

reply via email to

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