[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: history of the tags (was: hitory of the tags)

From: Donald Sharp
Subject: Re: history of the tags (was: hitory of the tags)
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:43:16 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.4i

On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 05:24:57PM -0500, Derek R. Price wrote:
> Donald Sharp wrote:
> > Here's a first crack at it.  Probably still needs some work, but wanted
> > to get some feedback ;)  It's attached to the end of this email...
> That's not a complete fix.  Here's what I noticed:

Yep, I was aware of it.  I wasn't sure of how to handle some of the
more 'esoteric' cases... ;)

> 1)  There's no filename or directory saved to the history log, leaving the
> user with no idea which files were tagged.  You need to list both filename
> and directory since, unlike rtag, tag can specify individual files, each
> tagged file must be listed in the history separately, like a commit history
> entry.  Note that this will require a new record type.

Yep, and I didn't do this because the rtag operation doesn't do the same
thing( it only creates a one line entry and it tags an entire module ).
Do we want the rtag operation to also do this as well?

I was thinking that I wanted consistency across the rtag and tag
operations( in what it put into the history file ), but I don't
know if that is feasible the more I think about it.  My other
concern was having to change the cvs history -t command as well..

> 2)  'A' is not really appropriate in lieu of a revision number or symbolic
> "base" tag.  A user would have to run a second command to find which revision
> number the tag was attached to.  This information should be added for the tag
> delete log too since the user would not have to trace back through the log to
> find what the last tag op to that file was to know where the delete happened
> - information which might not be available if the history log was ever reset
> and which would be hard to calculate based on the current rtag logs.  I would
> advocate that the symtag should be listed if in the original tag command, but
> whatever the final affected numerical tag is should be listed too.  If the
> tag was a move that should probably be listed too, perhaps as a "delete" then
> a "tag", but a single entry might be more succinct and there should still be
> plenty of namespace, especially if you make "delete", "add", and "move" sub
> record types of "tag".  I'm thinking it might be appropriate to alter rtag to
> use the new log format as well.

ok.  The more I think about it, I think you are correct.  I'll go
and make some changes ;)

> 3)  Don't forget that a final patch submission should contain a ChangeLog
> entry and any necessary doc changes, but I'm sure I didn't need to remind you
> about that.  :)

Nope won't forget.  As I said earlier the whole point of this
exercise was to get some comments about the direction I was going.... 

Also I actually had been working on getting the working
right.  I'm finally starting to understand the insanity that is


> Derek
> --
> Derek Price                      CVS Solutions Architect ( 
> )
> mailto:address@hidden     OpenAvenue ( )
> --
> Justice: A decision in your favor.

reply via email to

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