[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Maintaining branches...

From: Paul Sander
Subject: Re: Maintaining branches...
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 09:36:48 -0700

Just a couple of brief comments...

>--- Forwarded mail from address@hidden

>Modifying CVS to record (with intergity) and use recorded merge
>information might require much code work in cvs. (Not to say that
>it wouldn't be great to have the functionality, or that I have ever
>seriously looked at the source). Whether it can be done with RCS
>new phases or something similar to editors/watchers (the
>"permanent") location), there would be things commands would need
>to do.

>First, it might be necessary to store merge info temporarily in the
>working CVS subdirectory first, then promote the files' merge info
>to the "permanent" location on commit of the files.

>cvs co command:
>    * without options, would have to check to make sure locally
>stored merge info for a file being checked out doesn't exist, if it
>does (a unix rm on the working file has been perform and is being
>replaced) it should discard the merge info for that file.
>    * -j would have to record merge info locally

>cvs update command:
>    * -A would have to check for locally stored merge info for the
>file and remove it before updating

Note that -r should do the same.

>    * without options, same as co without options
>    * without options, cvs update on a merged working copy needs to
>update the merge info in the working dir's CVS subdirectory for the
>    * -j would have to record merge info locally, also would have
>to deal with multiple -j calls on the same file.

>cvs commit command:
>    * this should move merge info from the working dir CVS
>subdirectory to the permanent location (RCSfile, CVS subdir in
>repository) and clear the local merge info in the CVS subdir.

>The above might be mandatory for a first release to track merges, I
>am sure there are more changes that might be needed.

>Then there's the changes to commands to use the merge information.
>Commands like:

>cvs status command:
>cvs log command:
>cvs history command:

>Maybe new commands:

>cvs findmerge -r<branch tag>

The "cvs update" command performs this function, using the -j options.

>I don't know what it would take to at least get cvs track merging
>in a robust way. This is all some thoughts I'd wanted to share.

>--- End of forwarded message from address@hidden

reply via email to

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