RE: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branch head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Christopher.Fouts
A picture paints a thousand words (David Gates of Bread) Because of my CVS experience, AND the help from you folks, I understand now WHY CVS does its branching. But I have to explain this to my users, and some of them are a lot less experienced than I am with the tool. So when they're looking at

RE: Cvswebclient installation problem..pl help

2004-05-20 Thread Jim.Hyslop
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, for the fourth time: I am using CVS on Windows.I am running CVSNT (server) and WinCVS (client).I have installed cvswebclient. Please stop! 1) This is a mail list, not a chat group. You must allow a minimum of 24 hours (48 is better) before expecting any kind of

RE: Cannot check in file after branch...?

2004-05-20 Thread Jim.Hyslop
Flossie wrote: Yeah had already seen that... although I understand in concept, I'm having trouble transferring that to 'real life' Maybe this week I'm operating in dummy mode ;-) I need more sleep Well, I can't help with the sleep, but I'll try to give a basic explanation of what a

Re: Cannot check in file after branch...?

2004-05-20 Thread Geoff Beier
On May 19, 2004, at 9:31 PM, Flossie wrote: I'm using TortoiseCVS and did not see what command it issued (nor do I want to learn various command-line args for controlling CVS actions) - I understand that feeling ;=) I haven't used TortoiseCVS - you might also try asking this question on a mail

RE: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branch head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Christopher.Fouts
I use tkCVS since I'm on a Unix machine (HPUX). tkCVS showing that branchY is not off branchX (because of the explanation folks here provided) is what started all this discussion for me. So in WinCVS, if you create a branch off a trunk, e.g., branchX, and then create branchY off branchX BEFORE

RE: binary files bad idea? why?

2004-05-20 Thread Jim.Hyslop
Spiro Trikaliotis wrote: This is no problem from my experience if the initial check-in was done from a Unix (LF-) based system, but it is a problem if it was done from a DOS (CR/LF-) based system. There is also a remote possibility that the binary file might _happen_ to contain what CVS

RE: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branc h head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Jim.Hyslop
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A picture paints a thousand words (David Gates of Bread) Only when there is something to paint. Applying a branch tag does not create anything, so there is nothing to paint. So, let me try giving you a few more dozen words to pass on to your users. Eventually, we'll get

FreeBSD CVSWeb on non-FreeBSD boxes (was Re: Branching bug ???)

2004-05-20 Thread Mark D. Baushke
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does it run on HPUX 10.20? Why not try it and tell us? If you have a recent 5.6.x version of PERL and the ability to do cgi scripts on your HP/UX 10.20 web server, then CVSWeb should work for you. fwiw: The legacy CVSWeb

RE: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branch head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Christopher.Fouts
Does it run on HPUX 10.20? -chris -Original Message- From: Ross Patterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 10:08 AM To: Fouts Christopher () Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branch head???) On Thursday 20

RE: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branch head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Christopher.Fouts
First, thanks a lot Jim!!! Really I still prefer this picture since it shows that branch_b is off branch_a, even though WE all know now that they're equivalent. +-++-++-+ | 1.1 || 1.2 || 1.3 | ... +-++-++-+ |

RE: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branch head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Christopher.Fouts
Yep, this is essentially what Jim's second picture shows, and what tkCVS shows. -chris -Original Message- From: Carucci, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 11:33 AM To: Fouts Christopher (); [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Branching bug ???

Re: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branch head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Ross Patterson
On Thursday 20 May 2004 08:25 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some of these folks are from Missouri so they say Show me! and a picture would be the perfect answer to this, regardless of version numbers. It sounds like you need CVSWeb. Check out http://www.freebsd.org/projects/cvsweb.html for

RE: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branch head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Christopher.Fouts
This picture that you drew for me! :) +-++-++-+ | 1.1 || 1.2 || 1.3 | ... +-++-++-+ | branch_a | branch_b tkCVS essentially shows this picture (also

Re: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branch head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Tom Copeland
On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 11:15, Bob Bowen wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you very much!!! Like I said, this all make perfect sense to ME now. However, to some of my users that haven't quite grasped the concept yet on WHY CVS does its branching the way you folks have patiently

RE: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branc h head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Jim.Hyslop
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First, thanks a lot Jim!!! Really You're welcome. We'll get there eventually. I still prefer this picture since it shows that branch_b is off branch_a, even though WE all know now that they're equivalent. Don't create an artificial distinction that will end up

CVS messing up Word documents

2004-05-20 Thread Kevin W Parker
We are using CVS in a Windows environment (server running under cygwin, client is usually WinCVS). CVS is managing our source code and assorted binaries just fine, but any Word document checked out in CVS when opened yields the error message The document name or path is not valid. These files

RE: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branchhead???)

2004-05-20 Thread Donald Sharp \(sharpd\)
I don't deny that clearcase is capable of supporting a number of branching models :).. What I was saying is that forcing a /0 version on parent branches can and will cause unnecessary merges( perhaps trivial, but it's more work still, even more work in cvs for that matter ). Especially if you are

RE: Branching bug ??? (was Re: Bug is tagging the head of a branc h head???)

2004-05-20 Thread Carucci, Jason
This is approximately the picture it draws. Of course it uses graphics not text so it looks a lot nicer. Foo.cpp | | |+-+ || 1.1 | +-+ | | | | +-+ | 1.2 | +-+ | | |

RE: binary files bad idea? why?

2004-05-20 Thread Greg A. Woods
[ On Wednesday, May 19, 2004 at 15:06:59 (-0400), Jim.Hyslop wrote: ] Subject: RE: binary files bad idea? why? CVS can easily handle binary files. It's just not necessarily as efficient at handling them as it is at handling text files. That is an outcome of the history of the utility - it was

Re: binary files bad idea? why?

2004-05-20 Thread Pierre Asselin
Jim.Hyslop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Spiro Trikaliotis wrote: This is no problem from my experience if the initial check-in was done from a Unix (LF-) based system, but it is a problem if it was done from a DOS (CR/LF-) based system. There is also a remote possibility that the binary file