Spiro: Unified diff format will not solve the posters problem of safely committing arbitrary files. It will also create more work.
As Pierre stated, Nestor should implement tighter guidelines for obtaining and submitting sources. This can be difficult if dealing with 3rdparty dev-co's (or internal management...) Anyhow, a possible solution is to ask that the entire _affected_ source tree with CVS info included be sent to you in an archive. (only include directories containing changed files.) Of course this means that you must ship a CVS tree to them to edit... but where else would they get the code? This is the only way to be able to safely check in changed code: - check out source modules that will be modified - tag these sources with a branch if you think they will break the head when merging - archive the sources - ship to modifier - recieve from modifier - add a safty tag (if you chose not to branch) - add changes on branch (or head if you chose not to branch) - build and test - merge changes into head if it was a success Really tho, this is a process problem. Not a cvs problem. _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
