Re: import inconsistency

[Derek Robert Price]

Max Bowsher wrote:

> Paul Edwards wrote:
>  
>
> > Strange Thing 3: People are perplexed why you don't use the
> > Attic, while as far as you can tell, you've set everything up in
> > the most logical manner possible.
> >    
>
> Your method probably is the most logical for the situation, but you are
> still using vendor branches in a way they were not originally intended for.
>
> Now, there may possibly be a way to make vendor branches work better in your
> use case, but I've missed any possible discussion on this because it has
> been swamped under all the head/Attic traffic.
>  

I was going to bring that up.  It might make sense to redesign the 
vendor branch system to accomodate such a complex process, but why not 
just do your first import, branch _that_, and merge future imports like 
they came off any other branch?  Is there any reason in your process to 
require the vendor branch, intended as a base for the trunk, other than 
the ease of typing a `cvs import' command?

Derek

--
               *8^)

Email: derek@ximbiot.com

Get CVS support at <http://ximbiot.com>!
--
"Thank GOD Microsoft doesn't build airplanes."