[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Official sources vs. RCVS
From: |
Derek R. Price |
Subject: |
Re: Official sources vs. RCVS |
Date: |
Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:24:39 -0500 |
"Cameron, Steve" wrote:
> Derek Price wrote:
> > compound of a static tag and ".origin". I think it would be easy for a
> > user to
> > expect that statictag.origin would return the origin of the branch that
> > the
> > static tag is on (it doesn't - it's returnning empty...).
> [smc] That isn't possible, I don't think (famous last words...).
>
> Here's why: the same revision marked by the static tag might be
> present on multiple branches, due to CVS's optimization of not
No, no, no. I totally agree. I meant that it would be easy for a novice user
to _expect_ that behavior, so if they attempt to retrieve statictag.origin they
should get an error message and not an empty revision.
Derek
--
Derek Price CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org )
mailto:dprice@openavenue.com OpenAvenue ( http://OpenAvenue.com )
--
It'll take a miracle to get you out of Casablanca and the Germans have outlawed
miracles.
- Sydney Greenstreet as Senor Ferrari, _Casablanca_
- Re: Official sources vs. RCVS, (continued)
- RE: Official sources vs. RCVS, Cameron, Steve, 2001/01/30
- RE: Official sources vs. RCVS, Cameron, Steve, 2001/01/30
- RE: Official sources vs. RCVS, J. Cone, 2001/01/31
- RE: Official sources vs. RCVS, Cameron, Steve, 2001/01/31
- Re: Official sources vs. RCVS,
Derek R. Price <=
- RE: Official sources vs. RCVS, Cameron, Steve, 2001/01/31