[cvsnt] Recursive add (as opposed to import)

Nick Duane nickdu at msn.com
Mon Aug 14 17:34:00 BST 2006

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.

Now that you mention it I was surprised when working on a previous project 
that some of my commits failed only on the comments.  I guess doing an 
update first and then a commit might reduce the potential to conflict on the 
$Log$ comments (though I can see that won't work between a branch and the 
trunk since when you update you will be updating against the branch).

So if I use the $Log$ comments I will end up with a merge conflict for every 
file that has changed both in the branch and the trunk?  Sounds like I won't 
be using $Log$.  Too bad because I did find it useful to see the comments in 
the file itself.


"Gerhard Fiedler" <lists at connectionbrazil.com> wrote in message 
news:rojg0l35d3ed$.dlg at connectionbrazil.com...
> Nick Duane wrote:
>>> Avoid $Log$ if you're doing merging - it doesn't merge well at all, 
>>> since
>>> all the log comments create differences.
>> Hmmm.  I find the $Log:$ comments very useful and would hate to loose 
>> that
>> feature.  I don't understand what you mean by them creating differences.
> See here for some info http://www.cvsnt.org/manual/html/Log-keyword.html
> Even if everything else in the file merges fine, the pack of log lines may
> create an unnecessary conflict that has to be fixed manually. Which then
> links back to the issue with the log entries in the file being "fixed"
> manually, without updating their original data in the cvsnt commit
> comments.
> Gerhard 

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