Re: About CVS edit-c.diff...

[Noel L Yap]

>I visited there but after your first letter. But it was probably due my
>illitteracy or alike that I couldn't connect RCVS (project that was
>marked to be in "planning" state) to your patches. BTW. What is/will be
>the difference between RCVS sources and sources in cvshome.org? RCVS
>seemed to have quite old versions of CVS source files.

Don't use the sources there -- they are old (cvs-1.10.8?).

>OK. Now I found them and downloaded too (to machine at home). There were
>quite many enhancement diffs. and I couldn't directly map them to
>edit-c.diff. Anyhow I guess "enh-multiple_edits+reservations.diff" is
>the one that I guess is similar one to edit-c.diff for 1.10.8.

Yeah, that's the one.

>Should I apply all the patches? Is there any particular order one should
>follow when applying all your patches?

You need only apply the patches you want.  The
"enh-multiple_edits+reservations.diff" patch combines the
"enh-multiple_edits.diff" and the "enh-reservations.diff" patches.  Order
doesn't matter but you may get conflicts with some combinations of patches.

>Unfortunately I got visitors at weekend and hadn't too much time to play
>with CVS sources. Anyhow I checkouted the anonymous CVS repository
>from cvshome.org to my home Linux. Doc format seems to be texinfo so
>that's no problem to me. Sanity.sh seems to be just plain bourne shell
>script and thus it shouldn't be too hard either to modify. You have got
>your volunteer here.

Awesome!

>I just need some time to get familiar with sanity.sh before I start to
>write the tests that are required. I won't give any time estimates when
>I'll be ready, but let's say latest during my vacation (beginning at end
>of June) I'll complete the work unless I found it "mission impossible"
>in some way.

Great.

>Could you please provide the test cases you know are needed.

0.0. editor0 and editor1 should be the same user to test the multiple edits
patch.
0.1. editor0 and editor1 check out a module.
1.0. editor0 does "cvs edit -c file".  It should succeed.
1.1. editor0 does "cvs editors".  This should have the new output if using the
"multiple-edits" patch.
1.2. editor1 does "cvs edit -c file".  It should fail.
1.3. editor1 does "cvs edit -c -f file".  It should succeed.
1.4. editor1 does "cvs editors".  This should have the new output if using the
"multiple-edits" patch.  It should also show both edits on the file.
1.5. editor1 does "cvs unedit file".
1.6. editor1 modifies the file.
1.7. editor1 does "cvs ci -c file".  This should fail.

I think this covers everything.  If someone else thinks of other cases, please
let us know.

Thanks much,
Noel



This communication is for informational purposes only.  It is not intended as
an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument
or as an official confirmation of any transaction. All market prices, data
and other information are not warranted as to completeness or accuracy and
are subject to change without notice. Any comments or statements made herein
do not necessarily reflect those of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., its
subsidiaries and affiliates.