>So, there are two principle approaches here:  Should the tags in the
>converted repository accurately reflect the tags in the CVS
>repository, so that you only get those files you would have gotten out
>of CVS, or do we take the revisionist approach of including also such
>files which do not have the tag but which were present on head when
>the tag was created, and therefore "ought" to have been tagged?

I'm of the opinion that the latter is preferable, since the lack of a
tag for a file is of minimal interest, and the alternative would have
to introduce artificial commits that are not on the main branches to
represent these tags.
  • CVS... Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum
    • ... Henrik Grubbstr�m (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum
    • ... Peter Bortas @ Pike developers forum
    • ... Martin Bähr
      • ... Henrik Grubbstr�m (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum
        • ... Martin Baehr
      • ... Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum
        • ... Martin Baehr
          • ... Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum
            • ... Martin Baehr
              • ... Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum
    • ... Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum

Reply via email to