Re: FW: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail thoughit 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
Re: FW: Commit inconsistency: Up-to-date check did not fail thoughit should have !
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Eric Siegerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 03:36:58PM +0200, Reinstein, Shlomo wrote:
>> I just wonder how come this does not cause problems in
>> the development of large projects that are kept in CVS.
>
>So do I!
Probably because, in most cases, it simply doesn't matter, and the speed
improvement you get it worth the minor inconvenience.
As I posted before, at least one other CM system, namely Perforce, acts in
a similar manner. And there are several large systems under P4 control,
including Open Source ones (Perl, for instance).
I imagine that the protocol will work either way, so if it bothers enough
people, make it a run time configuration option.
mrc
--
Mike Castle [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc
___
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
