>--- Forwarded mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[ On Friday, February 22, 2002 at 12:05:34 (-0800), Paul Sander wrote: ] >> Subject: Re: CVS Update Behaviour >> >> I don't know about anyone else, but I use "cvs log" every time I do a >> "cvs update" to read other people's thoughts about the changes they've >> made to the code I'm about modify. If just one of those files has been >> renamed in its past, then I want "cvs log" to show the file's entire >> history, before and after the rename (and indeed before and after >> *every* rename in its past).
>So? That's all pretty irrelevant. >How often have you had to run two or more commands to look at the >history of a file across a rename? (which is what I asked in the first >place) >I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that you'll only need to do this about >once per renamed file -- i.e. on the very first commit of an actual >change to a renamed file. And every time a merge is done from a branch where a rename was done on one of the branches. This involves several files every time a patch goes out, if the project was reorganized since the code diverged. This phonomenon is much more common than you think. >I know for a fact that's what happens for me and for everyone I've ever >worked with. Good for you. >I've only once ever in nearly eight years of using CVS had to retrieve a >revision from a renamed file and then "manually" do a diff against a >revision under the current name. <sarcasm> and oh, my, it was the most >horrifying and difficult and ugly thing I ever had to do with CVS! </sarcasm> Not renaming files is a fine workaround for lacking the ability to rename files, if you can live with it. You can obviously live with it, but some of us cannot. >--- End of forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs