Re: CVS Update Behaviour

[Paul Sander]

>--- Forwarded mail from address@hidden

>[ On Friday, February 22, 2002 at 12:05:34 (-0800), Paul Sander wrote: ]
>> Subject: Re: CVS Update Behaviour
>>
>> I don't know about anyone else, but I use "cvs log" every time I do a
>> "cvs update" to read other people's thoughts about the changes they've
>> made to the code I'm about modify.  If just one of those files has been
>> renamed in its past, then I want "cvs log" to show the file's entire
>> history, before and after the rename (and indeed before and after
>> *every* rename in its past).

>So?  That's all pretty irrelevant.

>How often have you had to run two or more commands to look at the
>history of a file across a rename?  (which is what I asked in the first
>place)

>I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that you'll only need to do this about
>once per renamed file -- i.e. on the very first commit of an actual
>change to a renamed file.

And every time a merge is done from a branch where a rename was done on
one of the branches.  This involves several files every time a patch goes
out, if the project was reorganized since the code diverged.  This
phonomenon is much more common than you think.

>I know for a fact that's what happens for me and for everyone I've ever
>worked with.

Good for you.

>I've only once ever in nearly eight years of using CVS had to retrieve a
>revision from a renamed file and then "manually" do a diff against a
>revision under the current name.  <sarcasm> and oh, my, it was the most
>horrifying and difficult and ugly thing I ever had to do with CVS! </sarcasm>

Not renaming files is a fine workaround for lacking the ability to rename
files, if you can live with it.  You can obviously live with it, but some
of us cannot.

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