|Subject:||Re: CVS Issues!!!|
|Date:||Wed, 14 Dec 2005 08:22:01 -0600|
We have started to put a new CVS process in place but we are running into a
few problems. We were trying to create a structure where we have an
integration branch off the main branch and then each engineer has their own
dev branches off the integration branch that they can code on.
Our branch create:
cvs tag -b int_banch
cvs update int_branch
cvs tag -b dev_banch
cvs update dev_branch
The first problem we see is that the dev branches are not really off the
integration branch as we would expect but they are both parallel instead. I
understand this is because a branch has to be off a revision but is this
going to be causing us problems?
1.1 --- int_banch
The second problem we seem to have is with the replacement tags such as
$log$ when we merge. When we merge back to int from dev and then commit the
commit's comment is added to the log at the top of the file. If we then try
to merge back out to dev from int it tells us that the file has changed
because of the extra comment line in the log. Is there a way around this?
Use -kk on the merge somehow?
Our merge to int from dev:
cvs update -d -P -j dev_branch
The last problem we are having is merging back XML files. If we merge an XML
file back to the integration branch from the dev even if it should be a
simple merge (Only added a few lines) a lot of the file ends up being in
conflict. I think this is because it is taking the 1.1 into account as a
common ancestor and the branches are parallel. Should we be using a second
-j in the merge to only take the changes from the last merge? Does CVS merge
XML files in any special way? Dose the file not ending in .xml cause a
problem? We have an old version of CVS does a new version handle XML better?
From: Larry Jones [mailto:address@hidden]
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 5:07 PM
To: Farshad Mahjoubi
Cc: 'Mark E. Hamilton'; address@hidden; address@hidden
Subject: Re: What are advantages to upgrade to newer version of Solaris CVS?
Farshad Mahjoubi writes:
> If we just want to experiement with this do we still need to do
> Cvs-1-12-SUN init!!
No. To date, you've never *had* to run "cvs init" after an upgrade,
it's just a good idea. And feel free to rename your executable to
something easier to type. :-)
These things just seem to happen. -- Calvin
Info-cvs mailing list
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|