[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: cvs update

From: Sergei Organov
Subject: Re: cvs update
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 19:33:12 +0300
User-agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) XEmacs/21.4.18 (linux)

Martin Jørgensen <address@hidden> writes:

> Sergei Organov wrote:
>> Martin Jørgensen <address@hidden> writes:
> -snip-
>> Then why did you put it under the CVS control in the first place?!
> Because sometimes that is the easiest thing to do under windows using
> drag and drop.

Maybe, but if it hurts, then just remove the file(s) in question from
CVS or at least never commit any changes to the file(s). Better yet, try
to force yourself to think about what you are doing even when you use
drag and drop ;)

>> Overall, my advice is to move report.log out of CVS control:
>> $ rm report.log
>> $ cvs remove report.log
>> $ echo "report.log" >> .cvsignore
>> $ cvs ci -m"Removed report.log" report.log .cvsignore
> I still don't see why cvs update cares about my local file and wants
> to merge anything that I on purpose didn't want to commit...

1. cvs update has nothing to do with commits and has no way to know
   which of your changes you are going to commit. It updates your local
   copy with the changes got from repository and it's entirely wrong for
   it to throw away local changes.

2. CVS has absolutely no idea what changes are essential and what
   aren't, so all of them are essential for it (you don't expect CVS
   will read your mind, do you?). Only changes to the files that aren't
   under CVS control aren't essential for CVS. So tell the CVS the truth
   about your files (don't put those that aren't essential under the CVS
   control), and everything will run much more smoothly.

3. It seems you are somehow missing the whole purpose of CVS. It's there
   to do its best to *preserve* all the changes, not to drop them at its
   own will.

-- Sergei.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]