"Greg A. Woods" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> >
> > Thank you for this additional info. I wanted
> > to do something similar to this, but I'm just
> > now realizing that maybe CVS doesn't work the way
> > I had hoped. I want to "live" in the branches,
> > not in the trunk.
>
> It's much deeper than that.
> ...
> If you want to use the magic CVS vendor branch and "cvs import" in the
> way it works best then you must avoid creating local branches (which
> means you must mix all your local changes with each other on the trunk)
> and live with the fact that after each "cvs import" there will be a
> period of instability until the vendor changes are merged to the trunk
> and successfully committed.
Thank you for all the details and recommendations. You've
convinced me -- "living" in the branches is not the correct
approach. :-)
After some local experimentation and scouring the web
a bit more, I see that managing and incorporating local changes
to third party source code is best done in the main trunk -- not
in the branches. This does want I want/expected.
I plan to only venture off on to branches when necessitated
by changes to older releases, but not as a matter of daily practice.
Wish me luck... ;-)
Thanks again,
Allen
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
