[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Again: multiple vendors
From: |
Pierre Asselin |
Subject: |
Re: Again: multiple vendors |
Date: |
Fri, 4 Mar 2005 02:42:56 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
tin/1.6.1-20030810 ("Mingulay") (UNIX) (NetBSD/2.0 (i386)) |
Greg A. Woods <address@hidden> wrote:
> Multiple vendor branches CANNOT work for what you want. Period.
Maybe with the new "import -X" in cvs 1.12.x ? This was touched
upon briefly in another thread.
https://www.cvshome.org/docs/manual/cvs-1.12.11/cvs_16.html#SEC154
I once did a two-vendor series of imports after gathering historical
tarballs from the net. The "main" vendor went on 1.1.1 and the
"secondary" went to 1.1.3 . The purpose was to merge some of
the patches in the secondary line into a late main-vendor release.
The multiple vendor branch was not funny, so I agree with Greg.
I had to manually reset many "admin -b" values, move files in and
out of the Attic (I think), etc. When I got to the point where
a plain trunk checkout gave me a current main-vendor release,
I could start working.
The net result of all the imports plus surgery is that I had my
tarballs in CVS, each with a unique tag. I could diff any two of
them, examine the patches, decide what to apply, etc. That part
went very well ! The fact that the tarballs were on vendor branches
was pretty irrelevant.
The new "-X" import seems to create independent, non-interfering
vendor branches (and an empty trunk!). The OP could try that,
merge one of them to the trunk and start merging deltas. It
might work without surgery. Then again, I havent' actually done it,
this is just an impression from reading the docs.
--
pa at panix dot com
- RE: Long version numbers | Tedious to keep track, (continued)
RE: Long version numbers | Tedious to keep track, Jim.Hyslop, 2005/03/02
- Re: Long version numbers | Tedious to keep track, Todd Denniston, 2005/03/02
- Again: multiple vendors (was: Re: Long version numbers | Tedious to keep track), Baurzhan Ismagulov, 2005/03/02
- Re: Again: multiple vendors, Greg A. Woods, 2005/03/03
- Re: Again: multiple vendors, Baurzhan Ismagulov, 2005/03/03
- Re: Again: multiple vendors, Greg A. Woods, 2005/03/03
- Re: Again: multiple vendors, Baurzhan Ismagulov, 2005/03/06
- Re: Again: multiple vendors, Kaz Kylheku, 2005/03/07
Message not availableRe: Again: multiple vendors,
Pierre Asselin <=
Re: Again: multiple vendors, Baurzhan Ismagulov, 2005/03/06
Message not availableRe: Again: multiple vendors, Pierre Asselin, 2005/03/06
Re: Again: multiple vendors, Baurzhan Ismagulov, 2005/03/20
Re: Again: multiple vendors, Larry Jones, 2005/03/04
Re: Again: multiple vendors, Baurzhan Ismagulov, 2005/03/06
Message not available
Re: Long version numbers | Tedious to keep track, Xapp, 2005/03/02