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

[Derek R. Price]

Larry Jones wrote:

> Donald Sharp writes:
> >
> > This is starting to get complicated.  Should we rework the cvs history
> > output for the 'T' record?
>
> I think it's better to leave the history stuff alone and let the few
> people who care about recording tag information use taginfo to do it.

I don't know.  Seems simple enough to me.  Tag information was being
recorded.  Just not all of it.  And all the other operations except Join
and Import are logged here, with notes in the comments that Join and Import
should be implemented.

If Donald is willing to do the work and design the tests, I don't have a
problem with reviewing the code and checking it in.

Also, better tag logging isn't that uncommon a request.  Once it's done I
also see potential for an enhancement that would allow multiple merges from
a branch without tracking the previous merge points yourself.  i.e. CVS
could notice that a merge had been done from branch1 to branch2 in the
past, "add" all the merge ranges, then only merge what hadn't been merged
in the past.  I'm sure something could be worked out for backouts too so
that they wouldn't require extra tags as well.  Perhaps an implicit join
naming scheme would do the trick and could be used similarly to the ".*"
tags Steve Cameron implemented but which haven't been checked into the main
code yet.

Did I miss anything?

Derek

--
Derek Price                      CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org )
mailto:address@hidden     OpenAvenue ( http://OpenAvenue.com )
--
Any sufficiently perverted technology is indistinguishable from Perl.