[cvsnt] Re: Branch merging - this seems wrong...

Tony Eva teva at Airspan.com
Wed Jun 7 14:14:37 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.

Gerhard Fiedler wrote: 
> I really think that both approaches (Tony Hoyle's comments 
> about merge points and our need to have temporary development 
> branches that stay in sync with the main development branch) 
> converge in my suggestion to only merge from A to B, and 
> after the final merge from A to B, /copy/ B to A.

Yes, that's right.  This is really just a matter of semantics,
really, since the copy is just a special case of a merge where
the merge target has not changed since the merge point.
In the absence of a better solution it's the only way I can
see to move forwards.

> What you might want here is a "branch copy"
> command, but that can easily be done with a script. 

It's easy to see how this could be done with a temporary

(assume file.c is modified and committed on BranchB)
cp file.c file.c.tmp
cvs update -r BranchA file.c
cp file.c.tmp file.c
cvs commit file.c

...but is there a neater way to do it without hacky temp


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