If anyone is going to fix this, I suggest that this speed improvement is made configurable - either for the user, as a command-line option to "cvs commit", or at least for the CVS administrator, e.g., as an option in CVSROOT/config. Shlomo
-----Original Message----- From: Eric Siegerman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 8:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FW: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail though it should have ! On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 03:36:58PM +0200, Reinstein, Shlomo wrote: > I have also looked up the sources of CVS. In commit.c, there's the following > comment: (I'm quoting) > /* Sending only the names of the files which were modified, added, > or removed means that the server will only do an up-to-date > check on those files. This is different from local CVS and > previous versions of client/server CVS, Yikes; I had no idea! That does seem pretty conclusive, though :-/ > but it probably is a Good > Thing, or at least Not Such A Bad Thing. */ I'd sure like to know *why* he felt that. The commit message (src/commit.c rev 1.40) is no more revealing than the comment. I imagine the change was made as a speed improvement, but that doesn't seem sufficient grounds for the resulting violation of user expectations -- at least, not without more justification than was given. > I just wonder how come this does not cause problems in > the development of large projects that are kept in CVS. So do I! -- | | /\ |-_|/ > Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | / A distributed system is one on which I cannot get any work done, because a machine I have never heard of has crashed. - Leslie Lamport _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs