[cvsnt] Re: Merging branches with mergepoints

Tony Hoyle tony.hoyle at march-hare.com
Fri Dec 2 22:38:10 GMT 2005

Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.

Detlef Marschall wrote:

> Both came from HEAD, B1 from "rev. 1.3" and B2 from "rev. 1.8". Sorry
> for confusion. All branches came from HEAD.
There's no logical connection between a branch based on revision 1.3 and 
a branch based on
revision 1.8 - they may be completely different streams of development, 
or they may be quite similar.. it's not something you can solve with 
mergepoints.  However this isn't really a problem.

>>After the first merge you will have a mergepoint and it'll work normally.
> That's right, but is not acceptable in our development. We must then use
> the "commit --> merge with TAG and Branch --> TAG" way. Mergepoints are
> very useful, but in that case they are to complicated and cause more
> problems as they solved.

You stated that you're merging HEAD->B1 then B1->B2 - mergepoints will 
handle this well. The first merge B1->B2 will be the hardest of course, 
but once that is done it'll work well (just standard promotion levels, 
which is done by a lot of people).


More information about the cvsnt mailing list
Download the latest CVSNT, TortosieCVS, WinCVS etc. for Windows 8 etc.
@CVSNT on Twitter   CVSNT on Facebook