From owner-freebsd-current Mon Jun 21 10:23: 0 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from picnic.mat.net (picnic.mat.net [206.246.122.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09CA21508A for ; Mon, 21 Jun 1999 10:22:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from chuckr@picnic.mat.net) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost) by picnic.mat.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA95678; Mon, 21 Jun 1999 13:21:35 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 13:21:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey To: Nate Williams Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: laying down tags In-Reply-To: <199906211715.LAA04383@mt.sri.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 21 Jun 1999, Nate Williams wrote: > > > > I notice that in the last 6 months a change has occurred in how we use > > > > our cvs tools, in that there's a great increase in the usage of tags. > > > > Would you mind giving one example where not having tags hurt us? > > > Sure. When multiple developers are trying to work together as well as > track -current, everything has to be done by hand. Case in point is the > work that the VM guys want to do. It would be alot easier for both the > developers *AND* the testers to share code this way. This also makes it > much easier for the developer to 'merge' in changes made to the main > branch, rather than having to hand-merge it in everytime, build diffs, > and re-distribute them. > > The other developers then need to back-out the original diffs, re-apply > the new diffs, which is alot more work. With CVS, this is done *ONCE* > for each change (by CVS), hence the amount of work to help out is much > less. > > What 'cheaper' way could this kind of easy integration be done, short of > using the 'magic' branch tags in the FreeBSD CVS version that I don't if > anyone has ever used because I don't think anyone knows exactly if it > works, and how to make it work. OK, now I see the light. I've had a lot of people responding, but all the other responses could be covered by the use of date checkouts. This makes sense. I get very stubborn when I'm given (what appears to me to be) a bogus argument, even if the ultimate conclusion is right. The reason given for the conclusion has to hold water. > > > > Nate > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@picnic.mat.net | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run picnic and jaunt, both FreeBSD-current. (301) 220-2114 | ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message