On Tuesday 28 November 2006 18:48, Peter Clifton wrote: > Perhaps it is cleanest to make a different branch anyway, that way the > name of the branch can reflect the development direction.
Yes, it is *very* bad practise to reuse CVS branches! I would very strongly recommend that you make a new branch from HEAD for the purpose, and as you and Carlos have suggested wait until glist_dev has merged before doing so. <plug type="shameless">Of course, if gEDA was using a modern VCS such as git[1] (my favourite) or mercurial[2] then we wouldn't even be having this discussion, because you can have as many branches as you like without any of the problems associated with CVS branches...</plug> Peter [1] <http://git.or.cz/> (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_(software)> has good info too) [2] <http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/> -- Fisher Society committee http://tinyurl.com/o39w2 CUSBC novices, match and league secretary http://tinyurl.com/mwrc9 CU Spaceflight http://tinyurl.com/ognu2 v3sw6YChw7$ln3pr6$ck3ma8u7+Lw3+2m0l7Ci6e4+8t4Gb8en6g6Pa2Xs5Mr4p4 hackerkey.com peter-b.co.uk
pgpJNOD09os0e.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
