On Tue, 26 Feb 2002 15:34:25 -0500, Eric Siegerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 01:27:41PM +0000, Chuck Taylor wrote: >> -- The recursive action of cvs tag puts a sticky tag on >> directories themselves, which interferes with cvs add >> ("-->Using per-directory sticky tag ..." followed by errors >> like "cannot add a file on a branch..."). >Upgrade! The current CVS is quite happy to add files on a >branch. Indeed it does. And with your points in favor of tagging everything, I may recommend that my group change its procedure (after installing an upgraded version of CVS on our development network). Thanks for the good information. ... >> Yet someone took the time to implement the -f option in the cvs tag >> command, and presumably it works as it was meant to work. What was >> its intended purpose? >No clue. Sorry. >It occurs to me that this option might be more useful if it >worked properly, but I don't really know what "properly" is. I >guess your proposal's as good as any... I was able to make the option work "properly" (as I see it) with a small addition to the CVS source. But that's before I discovered (from your reply) that the current version of CVS will add files on a branch, which gives me more room to lean away from using the -f option at all. Thanks again. -- Chuck Taylor http://home.hiwaay.net/~taylorc/contact/ _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs