Re: Tags and Branches

[Todd Denniston]

Tim Cook wrote:
> 
<SNIP> 
> As far as I understand a branch was made on the main development and
> labelled blah00. Since then
> some changes have been made to the branch and each set of changes has been
> labelled blah01,
> blah02 and blah03.
> 
> I wanted to see what changes were made between each label so I attempted to
> get a specific
> release using "cvs co -r blah00 ..." and "cvs co -r blah01 ..." so I could
> do a comparison between them.
> 
> What I actually got checked out was different from what I expected. I'd
> assumed if I specified a tag
> ie "-r blah01" then I would get all versions with that tag. What I seemed
> to get was the latest versions
> on that branch.
<SNIP>

If blah0[0123] are all BRANCH tags then it would make sense that you are
getting the latest version on each of the branches.
http://www.cvshome.org/docs/manual/cvs_5.html#SEC54


in http://www.cvshome.org/docs/manual/cvs_5.html#SEC57 note the comment
"rather than just a symbolic revision name" 
symbolic names are covered in:
http://www.cvshome.org/docs/manual/cvs_4.html#SEC48

A branch tag names where a development division comes off of the trunk (or off
of previous branch).  Though I suppose with some manipulation you could also
use the tag to get the set of files that were at the root of the branch, it has
been talked about on this list before and seemed to me somewhat more than a
trivial exercise to do, which is why most people seemed to suggest creating a
normal tag and then creating a branch tag using that normal tag (searching the
archive http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/info-cvs/ should give you the information
you need if you want to see the roots of the branches).


-- 
I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb.  Thank you.
        -- Vance Petree, Virginia Power