Re: Results of egrep -l '^<<<<<<< |^=======$|^>>>>>>> |^\|\|\|\|\\|\| '

[Greg A. Woods]

[ On Wednesday, July 25, 2001 at 23:56:38 (-0700), Paul Sander wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Results of egrep -l '^<<<<<<< |^=======$|^>>>>>>> 
> |^\|\|\|\|\\|\| '
>
> Fine.  I've imported the vendor's sources.  Now I merge them into the trunk.
> CVS now refuses to commit my merge because the vendor has supplied conflict
> markers which appear in the output of the merge even though CVS did not
> introduce them.

Your theoretical arguments are getting really really silly.  In over
eight (8) _years_ of using CVS nearly daily, and primarily for
third-party code using the vendor-branch technique, with total amounts
of code probably approaching 10 gigabytes (10*1024*1024*1024), I have
never _ever_ encountered even one single instance of such a problem.

Indeed if I've ever found conflict markers in third-party code they were
in fact actual unresolved conflicts representing bugs in the code!  Bugs
that the third party did actually want to learn about!!!!

> On the other hand, I MUST escape, quote, or otherwise hide the conflict
> markers just to get the file under source control.

Yes, that's what you MUST do, UNLESS you never change that particular file.

If you never make local changes to a vendor-branched file then you NEVER
have to worry if it contains contructs that can be mistaken for conflict
markers.

>  Now, when I do my
> "cvs diff | mail", the vendor sends me two things:  A nastygram reprimanding
> me for sending in a gratuitous change (for the umteenth time, because we
> exchange sources on a regular basis), and a new update with the conflict
> markers restored.

Exactly.  You're being lame.  You should keep track of your local
changes much better than that.  You should NEVER EVER believe that you
can do something so simple as "cvs diff | mail vendor" without getting
back a nastygram!!!!!!!

(Yes, I agree that CVS' vendor-branching scheme does not lend itself
well to tracking individual changes to third-party code.  Oh well.)

>  And the new update must again be merged, which removes
> the escape/quote/hide mechanism that I must once again re-add after the merge.
> And the process repeats.

you're still forgetting how merging works in vendor-branched modules!!!!!!

> This is bogus in a big way.

Your argument is totally bogus, and totally fictitious.

-- 
                                                        Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <address@hidden>     <address@hidden>
Planix, Inc. <address@hidden>;   Secrets of the Weird <address@hidden>