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 email@example.com.
Then it should work as is. You could improve it by an unknown percentage by removing the list and just returning the highest candidate revision number. (or not, it's 90% faster as it is, so what's another few percent? ;> ) -Kelly > -----Original Message----- > From: evs-bounces at cvsnt.org [mailto:evs-bounces at cvsnt.org] On Behalf Of > Tony Hoyle > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 7:18 PM > To: evs at cvsnt.org > Subject: Re: [evs] Current status > > Kelly F. Hickel wrote: > > it's not set currently. An unpatched cvs 1.12 would ignore the branches > > that had been created with a CVS_LOCAL_BRANCH_NUM value, one with the > > current patch would choose the highest unused value. There's some > > question as to which is correct. If the old behavior is what you want, > > We've always been clear - RCS version numbers (and therefore branch > numbers) are internally generated server data. > > Whatever scheme is used, as long as it still fits within the general > pattern of RCS version numbers (<parent>.<branch>.<revision> normally, > and branch is normally an even number greater than zero) so that > frontends can still graph it etc. then it could be random for all we > care (and if it's faster to randomise it then feel free to do so). > > Tony > _______________________________________________ > evs mailing list > evs at cvsnt.org > http://www.cvsnt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evs