[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest |
Date: |
Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:39:17 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
>>>> I really can't imagine why "tag" would be a problem. "tag" is suppose
>>>> to tag exactly the revisions of the files you have currently checked
>>>> out, so if those files are fine, so is your tag.
>>> That's exactly the problem. Your checked out files may be out of date
>>> wrt. the repository.
>>
>> "Out of date" in which sense? You mean, there might have been some
>> commits performed since?
> No, there were some commits performed before!
Before what?
Here's how the scenario I have in mind:
cvs update
...blabla build, glance at it, try it out, maybe make a tarball of it...
cvs tag
In what way can this be inconsistent with "the One True Repository"?
In what way is this going to be inconsistent with a checkout by date?
In what way could commits performed "before" affect the consistency?
Is this yet another CVS breakage of which I'm not aware?
Stefan
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, (continued)
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Chong Yidong, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Stefan Monnier, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Stefan Monnier, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Stefan Monnier, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/12/09
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, David Kastrup, 2009/12/10
- Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/12/10
Re: Emacs 23.1.90 pretest, Steven Knight, 2009/12/09