[Top][All Lists]

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

Cvsnt merge with main cvs source tree ??

From: Andrew G. Tereschenko
Subject: Cvsnt merge with main cvs source tree ??
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 20:43:57 +0300

Hmm ...
We must just watching on history ?
Why don't create it ?

I dislike idea to have several version of CVS source tree.
I'm willing to fix troubles i've found while using cvs in our
firm and i don't want them to lose them with new version
of cvs will be avaible. I don't have so many time to apply
them localy with each version become available.
That's why i can spend several days to merge
CVSNT (and WinCVS) with main source tree
(if main tree maintainer allow me to do it).

I wish fully functional CVS server for Win32
will be available from main source tree and don't
have delays with security/bug fixes issues.

Don't you want save your time and give
full WIn32 server to core cvs team ??

You decide ...

In few days i will give two patches -
for cvsnt tree to sync with main tree,
and patch for main tree to allow server
support on Win32.

P.S> CC: me in reply's.
Andrew G. Tereschenko
Integrated Banking Information Systems

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden Behalf
> Of Tony Hoyle
> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2000 8:14 PM
> To: Andrew G. Tereschenko
> Cc: 'Terris'; address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Cvsnt] Merge with Cvs 1.11 source tree ??
> "Andrew G. Tereschenko" wrote:
> >
> > Possibly - but do we need two Cvs source trees ???
> > Anyway - sometimes we will need to merge it -
> > why not do it now ?
> >
> cvs 1.11 is almost identical to 1.10.8, and is missing features
> (such as the cvs edit patch) which are in cvsnt.  From reading the
> info-cvs mailing list it looks like there are moves to remove pserver
> altogether.  If that were to happen then the main CVS tree
> would become
> useless.  I'm watching CVS development to see what happens in the
> future.
> For now the version we have is working and there is no need
> to upgrade.
> Tony

reply via email to

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