Re: renaming under CVS

[Mark D. Baushke]

Noel wrote:

>Let me explain so even you can understand: Developer A should be able
>to modify a file while developer B renames it.  The merge should go
>gracefully and seemlessly regardless of who checked in first since
>there is no conflict.  But this isn't true when using CVS.

Well, even in other systems that do version control of directories,
the above is not usually that peaceful (cf, ClearCase).

Once long ago in a dim memory I recall on some mailing list we talked
about the possibility of adding version control to directories.

It is possible to extend cvs to deal with renames of directories and
files, it just requires a lot of work.

Right now cvs gets very confused if you create a subdirectory foo and
also manage to have a foo,v in the same directory. Clean up that
glitch by making a ,v file with the same name as a directory be a
special version controlled entity that controls the names of files in
that directory and you have the basis of a solution to version
controlling names...

Of course, this means an extra few checks for files with the same
names as directories and it also means coming up with a reasonable
format to describe versioned elements for the directory and what it
means to move a file to a different directory.

The biggest downside here is the performance hit of needing to look
for a ,v file to shadow every directory. However, it may also mean
that support for something like a symbolic link might also be possible
and I know of a number of people that would like to see those added to
what cvs is able to track.

        Enjoy!
        -- Mark