Re: Basic usage question

[Kaz Kylheku]

In article <address@hidden>, Wade Williams wrote:
>Myself and another programmer are working on a project.  We're working
>mainly on different sections of the code.
>
>Day 1:  I checkout the project
>Day 2:  I make changes and commit them, and then continue working on my
>working copy.
>Day 3:  Programmer B makes changes and commits them

If B does a module-level commit, then B's commit attept should fail with
the ``up to date check failed'' diagnostic on files that you commited on
day 2, assuming that B did a checkout before day 2, and has not updated
since then.  Thus B is forced to update to incorporate your changes via
cvs update, resolve any conflicts and try the commit again.

If people cheat by committing only the files that they modified, they
can get around the up to date check. But that is a bad idea because
the changes you make in one set of files can semantically conflict with
changes in another set of files.