On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 02:24:47PM -0700, Shankar Unni wrote:
>
> The problem was, if one of the files was *deleted* on the branch, cvs
> tag wouldn't move the tag for that file - you'd have to use cvs rtag for
> it. The developer in question had done separate "cvs rm"s on the
> mainline and the b
, October 23, 2002 2:13 PM
To: Shankar Unni
Cc: 'CVS-II Discussion Mailing List'
Subject: Re: tag vs rtag question
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 01:58:27PM -0700, Shankar Unni wrote:
> > I would think that with the situation above, doing a cvs tag
> > VENDOR_R2_MERGED in the work
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 01:58:27PM -0700, Shankar Unni wrote:
> > I would think that with the situation above, doing a cvs tag
> > VENDOR_R2_MERGED in the working directory where conflict resolution
> > was finished would be the safest method, to be sure you tagged the
> > resolved files and not
> I would think that with the situation above, doing a cvs tag
> VENDOR_R2_MERGED in the working directory where conflict resolution
> was finished would be the safest method, to be sure you tagged the
> resolved files and not something else.
On the other hand, if you have *deleted* a file, cvs
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 11:02:10PM +0300, Nick Patavalis wrote:
>
> ...Though I also have some confused ideas about what exactly HEAD
> means. Could please a CVS guru give us a precise *definition* of what
> the HEAD tag is?
>
Looking arround I find this which comes close to being a precise
defin
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 01:49:36PM -0500, Todd Denniston wrote:
> Nick Patavalis wrote:
> >
> > You merge the local changes
> >
> > cvs co -j VENDOR_R1 -j VENDOR_R2
> >
> > You resolve the confilicts, test the new sources, and generaly make
> > sure that everything is stable. Then commit your
