Re: Converting a branch into the main trunk

[Derek R. Price]

Of course, you might be losing minor bug fixes on the stable branch.  I'm with
Chuck.  I'd try the merge first.  CVS usually handles them pretty well.
Basically, if the same lines have been changed in a file on each branch, then
the change will be flagged as a conflict.  Otherwise they will be merged
correctly by CVS.

Ocassionally with large changes (or even small ones but they're less common)
you might encounter compile or run time errors based on function names or APIs
or variable names being changed on one branch while new references to the old
name or API were added to the other, but those are usually easy to track and
fix.

Derek

--
Derek Price                      CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org )
mailto:address@hidden     OpenAvenue ( http://OpenAvenue.com )
--
Organ transplants are best left to professionals.
Organ transplants are best left to professionals.
Organ transplants are best left to professionals...

          - Bart Simpson on chalkboard, _The Simpsons_

Rudy Zung wrote:

> If you truly want a complete overwrite, update to the HEAD, then delete your
> local files, then merge in the branch; this in effect makes CVS merge in all
> the branch onto an empty local file, and everything that was the HEAD is
> overwritten by the branch being merged in.
>
> Of course, then commit.
>
> ...Ru
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Deever, Chris C. [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 8:31 AM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Converting a branch into the main trunk
>
> When merging a development branch into the HEAD trunk, is it possible to
> somehow insure that code development branch always overwrites the main trunk
> completely?
>
> Since CVS does a line by line diff comparison to determine what code to
> merge, I'm a bit hesitant to do the merge since the two versions of code are
> very different at this point.  I'd like to know that the code in the
> development branch will always take precedence over code in the HEAD trunk.
>
> Maybe there is a way to simply rename the branches?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris