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.
Johannes Kilian wrote: >> If I understand you correctly, this shouldn't be. What says the cvs status >> of one of these rogue files? > > Yes you understood correct: this shouldn't be. > I'm not sure whether this is a "special behaviour" of vendorbranches or > of "cvs import" - or a combination of both. Ah, now I think I got it, and it seems I was wrong. > 2. New files on the second vendorbranch (files that are new in > comparison to the initial vendorbranch) were imported in that way that > they exist as revision 1.1 on the trunk and 1.1.3.1 on the second > vendorbranch. They don't exist on the initial vendorbranch. I think this is how cvs import works. I normally don't use it, so someone else with more experience with it may be able to confirm (or correct) this. You probably can fix your problem quite easily by avoiding cvs import. I use the recursive add functions of WinCvs or TortoiseCVS in a situation like this. I find them more predictable than import :) Gerhard