>>>>> "TW" == Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> writes:
Thanks for the explanation Thomas, that's exactly how I manage the
Mailman trees too. A couple of notes.
TW> I keep the Mailman 2.0.x and 2.1 (head) branches in two
TW> different directories, the 2.0-branch one checked out with:
TW> cvs -d twouters@cvs.mailman.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/mailman
TW> co -r \ Release_2_0_1-branch mailman; mv mailman mailman-2.0.x
----------------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If I had to do it over again, I would have called this the
Release_2_0-maint branch. I think that makes more sense when you see
the Release_2_0_X tags along that branch.
This was really my first foray back into CVS branches after my last
disaster (the string-meths branch on Python). Things are working much
better this time, so I guess I understand how to use them now...
...except that I hit a small problem with CVS. When I was ready to
release a new patch release along the maintenance branch, I wasn't
able to coax CVS into giving me a log between two tags on the branch.
E.g. I tried:
cvs log -rRelease_2_0_1 -rRelease_2_0_2
(I don't actually remember at the moment whether it's specified like
this or with a colon between the release tags, but that's immaterial).
The resulting log messages did not include any of the changes between
those two branches. However a "cvs diff" between the two tags /did/
give me the proper output, as did a "cvs log" between the branch tag
and the end of the branch.
Could have been a temporary glitch in CVS or maybe I was dipping into
the happy airplane pills a little early. I haven't tried it again
since.
took-me-about-three-hours-to-explain-this-to-jeremy-on-the-way-to-ipc9
-but-the-happy-airplane-pills-were-definitely-partying-in-my
-bloodstream-at-the-time-ly y'rs,
-Barry
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4