[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: How to avoid propogation of changes

From: Chuck . Irvine
Subject: RE: How to avoid propogation of changes
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 15:06:03 -0600

> address@hidden wrote:
> > 
> > At any given time, we have multiple releases of our software under
> > development. Each release has it's own branch, with the 
> latest release
> > being developed on the trunk. We propogate changes 
> downstream by doing
> > merges from each release branch to the immediate downstream release
> > branch.
> > 
> > Here is the problem: What if we make a change that we don't want
> > propogated downstream. Does any one know of a good way to accomplish
> > this?
> > 
> Um, don't propagate it?
> Seriously, CVS doesn't move propagate changes by itself, so you
> must have some sort of mechanism to do so.  This means you've
> got to figure out how to optionally disable it.
> To give an example, we maintain_MERGED tags on our branches, so
> BRANCH_3 would have an associated BRANCH_3_MERGED tag. 

We do the same thing.

> We have
> a Perl script that will merge from a branch to, say, head.
> It merges everything from BRANCH_3_MERGED to BRANCH_3, and then
> moves BRANCH_3_MERGED.  

> This means that the way to avoid
> propagating a change is to move BRANCH_3_MERGED past it, and
> this is indeed what we do (I've got a Perl script for that, too,
> for consistency, and it's pretty short.)

This would require us to merge all of our files individually, whereas 
we merge the entire branch in a single command, i.e. update is invoked 
at the top level directory with no file args. Given that our 
application has over 3000 files, merging each file individually might 
not be tenable. This is an interesting idea though.\

Please let me know if I've missing something in what you have said. 
And, thanks.


reply via email to

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