[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: cvs edit/commit problem
From: |
Garth Winter Webb |
Subject: |
Re: cvs edit/commit problem |
Date: |
Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:25:57 -0700 (PDT) |
On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Richard J. Duncan wrote:
>
> Is this a know bug in CVS? Is there a known workaround? Maybe some
No it is not a bug. If CVS did this it would be a bad idea for the same
reason that the directive to automatically unedit the file you suggested
would be a bad idea. The known work around it to either:
* only edit what you intend to edit (rather than cvs edit *)
* explicitly unedit everything you edit
I would suggest a combination. Edit only what you need and unedit
everything you've edited explicitly. Editing everything in a directory
may be convient for the person working on the files, but what if a second
person wants to work on something the first person doesn't even intend to
touch? The second person must wait until the first has released his/her
edit for a file they weren't even using.
So my first suggestion would be to use this routine:
1) cvs edit <specific files>
2) vi <files>
3) cvs commit <files>
But if you must do a global edit * then:
1) cvs edit *
2) vi <file1, ...>
3) cvs unedit *
4) cvs commit
This way the programer explicitly releases those files. You could even
make a simple shell script that did those last two commands together.
Garth
- cvs edit/commit problem, Richard J. Duncan, 2000/10/05
- Re: cvs edit/commit problem,
Garth Winter Webb <=
- Re: cvs edit/commit problem, Noel L Yap, 2000/10/05
- Re: cvs edit/commit problem, Noel L Yap, 2000/10/05
- Re: cvs edit/commit problem, Noel L Yap, 2000/10/05
- RE: cvs edit/commit problem, Jerry Nairn, 2000/10/05
- Re: cvs edit/commit problem, Noel L Yap, 2000/10/05