RE: Simplifying the version number

[Jim.Hyslop]

Mike Do wrote:
> I am trying to correct an error that was made with our cvs 
> repository a
> while back. We have what we consider to be our "main branch", 
> which has
> been tagged with the sticky tag R1-0. Most of the files with that
> sticky tag have a working version number in the form 1.1.2.x. However
> we have a few files that have much longer version numbers, e.g.
> 1.1.1.1.2.2.2.23. I guess when the original creation of the R1-0 main
> branch was done, it included files merged from other branches.
> 
> What we would like to do is to get all the files in the main branch to
> have a shorter version number, not necessarily 1.1.2.x but 1.1.x.y
> would do. Is this feasible at all? I hope my question makes sense...
Don't worry about it. Mere mortals like you and I should view branch numbers
as opaque magic numbers that only have meaning to the CVS program.

The long branch numbers indicate you have branched from a branch from a
branch. I've seen this sometimes when people don't use sticky and branch
tags properly. When you are modifying code, always make sure your sticky tag
refers to a branch tag, not to a non-branch tag.

-- 
Jim Hyslop
Senior Software Designer
Leitch Technology International Inc. ( http://www.leitch.com )
Columnist, C/C++ Users Journal ( http://www.cuj.com/experts )