Re: Long version numbers | Tedious to keep track

[Russ Sherk]

Why are you using these rel nums?  CVS auto generates these version
numbers.  The length of the version number must grow when branches are
made so that cvs can track multiple versions of (base) versions of a
file.

There really should only be a few scenarios which require direct use
of the cvs version numbers.

To simplify, it is advisable implement a tagging/branching system in
your repository.  Have a look at the cvs howto tags and branches
section.  There is a really good conceptual diagram of how tags work
with the rcs version numbers.  The history will always be preserved
(it is the nature of cvs; everything is versioned).

Creating a fresh root won't solve your probelm in the long run.

Cheers,

--Russ



On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 11:14:08 +0530, Swaroop George
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi,
> I am experiencing a peculiar problem. Ours is a huge project and had
> multiple enhancement versions going in since live. Inaddition, we have
> monthly maintenance release as well as patch releases on an as needed
> basis. All this led us creating multiple branches to the code base.
> And the version numbers have now become as long as 1.2.2.1.2.1.2.1 and
> quite cumbersome to handle.
> 
> - Is there anyway of alternate versioning and making it much more
> simple, but still maintaining the history to an extent.
> - How about creating a fresh root after archiving the current code to a 
> backup?
> 
> Bright ideas are welcome..
> 
> Thanks in advance
> Swaroop
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Info-cvs mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
>