[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Major revision number compatibility?

From: Thomas Eliassson
Subject: Re: Major revision number compatibility?
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 14:02:16 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.6) Gecko/20011120

On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 01:46:52PM +0100, Thomas Eliassson wrote:
Now when we start using CVS I see that we can use 'cvs commit -r2.4 file.txt' to commit a file with a specific revision number (in the example 2.4). Is this safe, or may we run into some trouble later on?

This is safe, in the sense that CVS will handle it just fine; it
won't corrupt your data or start spitting error messages.

The problem (or *a* problem; there may be others) is that
forevermore, every time someone adds a new file, they'll have to
remember to say:
        cvs add -r whatever_the_major_revision_number_is_right_now myfile

I think I was a little missunderstood.

We will ignore revision numbers now that we start using CVS.

I only wanted revision numbers for old files (pre-CVS) to continue in

the same line of numbers (to be easier to track).

I.e. if file was (pre-CVS)2.4, I'd like to put it in CVS as revision 2.4, but from that on use tags for releases (i.e. revision numbers will be 'ignored' by users). The point is that I don't want to have a pre-CVS file with revision 2.4 starting over again with 1.1 in CVS. I think that might confuse people later on. This also means that it's perfectly ok (even preferred) for new files to be numbered with 1.1, as long as I can still track files from before we had CVS. I also checked that this is the way it works (at least with our CVS setup), so if one file in the directory has rev. 2.6, a newly added file will have 1.1.

Thanks for your information.

Personal reply?
Remove .qb in mail address (spam blocker).

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]