Question on branches
Hello all, Hoping someone can help as I am a new users to CVS. I would like to know if there is a way to lock a specific branch to block commits within a CVS environment. We have an environment where we have several branches all created off main. I would like to have the ability to manage the branches indivdually where I can allow only certian users to commit changes to which ever branch. Currently I can apply a lock to the entire CVS repository but there are times when I don't want commits to occur in branch-A but there is no reason to block the commits to branch-B. I would also like to be able to dictate who can perform the commits. Thanks Zeus.___ Info-cvs mailing list Info-cvs@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
Generic Question on Branches
Hello, We are planning to have a Features-Integration-Branch ( For integration of 2 feature branches) and 2 Feature Branches ( Developers would basically work on these branches). My question is a. should all these three branches be created on the main or b. Should we create a Features-Integration-Branch on main and Sub branches under Features-Integration-Branch for the Feature1 and Feature2. In other words, Should the branch structure look like this (a) | | Main-line (Branch point tag : say, REL1) | |--- Features-Integration-Branch |--- Feature1 |--- Feature2 OR (b) This seems more logical | | Main-line (Branch point tag : say, REL1) | |--- Features-Integration-Branch | |--- Feature1 |--- Feature2 Any Comments would be highly appreciated Thanks Rohit
Re: Question on branches
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Please do not use HTML e-mail. Zeus Crisp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hello all, > > Hoping someone can help as I am a new users to CVS. > > I would like to know if there is a way to lock a specific branch to > block commits within a CVS environment. > > We have an environment where we have several branches all created off > main. I would like to have the ability to manage the branches > indivdually where I can allow only certian users to commit changes to > which ever branch. Currently I can apply a lock to the entire CVS > repository but there are times when I don't want commits to occur in > branch-A but there is no reason to block the commits to branch-B. I > would also like to be able to dictate who can perform the commits. Read https://ccvs.cvshome.org/source/browse/ccvs/contrib/cvs_acls.html?rev=HEAD Fetch, configure and deploy: https://ccvs.cvshome.org/source/browse/ccvs/contrib/cvs_acls.in?rev=HEAD You may find searching lists.gnu.org useful. Here is an interesting thread: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/cvs-utils/2004-02/msg00047.html Good luck, -- Mark -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFChviX3x41pRYZE/gRAh1wAKDhDP0IRyXystGoK527J19hIxN0aQCfT3Qa 0elk+gSxwG4L4Bci9q1CKFI= =T5Ht -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Info-cvs mailing list Info-cvs@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
Re: Generic Question on Branches
[ On Wednesday, August 9, 2000 at 23:52:44 (-0500), Rohit Desai wrote: ] > Subject: Generic Question on Branches > > My question is > a. should all these three branches be created on the main > or > b. Should we create a Features-Integration-Branch on main and Sub > branches under Features-Integration-Branch for the Feature1 and > Feature2. I don't think it makes a huge amount of difference, though it's probably easier in some respects to do the former. I would suggest though that you consider, if you haven't already, the case where you may have to re-create these branches after every release. In general I've found it rather difficult to use branches of the style CVS provides to do feature integration, particularly if you've also got a bunch of fixes to merge between release branches. In the best case all features are all always fully integrated in the baseline source and you control their availability with compiler or runtime flags. -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Planix, Inc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Secrets of the Weird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
