Re: cvs tag (mis)behavior

[Kaz Kylheku]

"Mark D. Baushke" <mdb@cvshome.org> wrote in message 
news:<mailman.1824.1044997120.21513.bug-cvs@gnu.org>...
> Derek Robert Price <derek@ximbiot.com> writes:
> 
> > Is there any good reason why 'cvs tag' will ignore files not currently
> > in the sandbox when -r is supplied?  It's supposed to operate locally,
> > but 'cvs update' is too and will find files that don't currently exist
> > in the sandbox when passed a tag via -r.
> > 
> > If nobody can argue successfully why this should be otherwise, I'm
> > going to alter the behavior of tag -r to match up -r.
> > 
> > Derek
> 
> Just so I am sure I understand...
> 
> If I have a module that checks out only some files for a given directory
> and then I use
> 
>       cvs tag -rBASE foo
> 
> this will cause a different set of files to be tagged than using
> 
>       cvs tag foo

As it should, because the BASE tag identifies some tagged baseline,
which may easily have different contents from the working baseline.

The current tag behavior violates the semantics of symbolic revisions;
-r BASE selects the right revisions, but possibly an incorrect set of
files---a set potentially different from what would be retrieved by
checkout -r BASE.