[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CVS bashing?
From: |
Paul Sander |
Subject: |
Re: CVS bashing? |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Apr 2001 01:18:14 -0700 |
--- Forwarded mail from address@hidden
>On Wed, Apr 11, 2001 at 06:06:22PM -0700, Paul Sander wrote:
>> - If a branch is merged multiple times to an ancestor, don't count the
>> result of the prior merge as a conflict. (Remember, CVS performs a
>As I said in an earlier post, this can be scripted around.
Yes, there is a workaround. One could argue that solving the problem
by design is a better approach.
>> - Invoke a type-specific merge tool, ideally one of the user's choice.
>Actually, simply "an external tool. Period" would be sufficient. Then
>said external tool can have whatever intelligence it wants to determine
>filetype and such. No need to push that into CVS.
It's possible to use a mechanism like a magic file (or any other approach)
to reach arbitrary levels of success to determinine a file's type. But
a general solution is to embed the file type (as specified by the user when
he uses "cvs add") in the CVS metadata and register a merge tool associated
with it. Type managers offer other advantages as well, but this is the most
obvious.
--- End of forwarded message from address@hidden
Re: CVS bashing?, Alexander Kamilewicz, 2001/04/18
Re: CVS bashing?, Paul Sander, 2001/04/11