On Tuesday 08 May 2007 12:04, you wrote: > Edward L. Fox wrote: > > On 5/8/07, scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> i was surpised by the fact that simply running 'svn update' bumped me > >> up to > >> 7.1a -- from previous posts i had thought there was something extra > >> that had > >> to be done to get the beta, like create a new 71a directory or something > >> > >> now i've got the beta i feel committed, and will commence chasing > >> after the > >> errors it spews from > >> > >> /usr/local/share/vim/vim71a/filetype.vim > >> > >> when i run it -- apparently the install created the 71a directory for me > >> > >> i am not asking any questions here, it's more like i'm warning those > >> who may > >> prefer to stay with a stable version > > > > No, there won't be any tags, branches here, every thing is just going > > linearly, giggling. > > I just stumbled upon the "svn update to disaster" myself. Maybe its time > to start getting a bit serious about project management? > > To the svn maintainer: The best practice is for the repository root to > look something like this: > /trunk (mirror of CVS, as usual) > /tags (contains 7.0/ and 7.1a/ folders -- obviously these folders are > static) > /branches (possibly used for contribs such as patches that didn't make > it into trunk (Bram's version) yet) > > To anyone else afflicted: To downgrade back to 7.0-stable, just do an > "svn update -r NNN" where NNN is the revision you want to downgrade to. > Check the logs for the exact revision, I don't know off hand. > > Cheers, > -Robert
the last stable one i had was 7.0.236 -- how would you specify that? not sure i need to, the fixes to filetype.vim were trivial -- a couple of patches only partly applied left '<<<<<<<<' and '>>>>>>>>>' in it sc
