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.
Hello Bo, BB> Doesn't the commit actually set the file back to the unedited status? If i understand your question, "cvs commit -e" doesn't clear edited status. So file remain "edited". BB> Doing an extra unedit seems to be a command too many. If i understand your question :-) Our regulation demand that developers should make changes in all branches at once so we need to keep edited status until all changes are done. After that a developer releases files (just rules). >>> >>> We use commit whith '-e' option (Keep edited files). So we have faced >>> with strange behaviour of cvs. >>> >>> When we call "cvs unedit" after successful "cvs commit -e" CVS said >>> that file was changed (d_test_b.srd has been modified; revert BB> changes?) >>> When we say "yes" file rollback to prev. version (before commit >>> operation). Is it expected behaviour? >>> TH>> Yes. Unedit rolls back to the last edit. BB> But is it correct? BB> IMHO This makes commit option '-e' useless. Look. It is a real BB> situation when i do a serial of changes and after that "release" file BB> (notify other developers that i don't edit that file anymore). So i BB> have done many commits, but system persist that i lose my changes. And BB> more it revert my changes back (not in a repository but in a sandbox). -- Best regards, Vladimir mailto:vab at borlas.ru