Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: sourceforge.net CVS tree ready for use
- X-seq: zsh-workers 10397
- From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: sourceforge.net CVS tree ready for use
- Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:29:19 +0000
- In-reply-to: <slrn8ee8jt.ic6.mason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <20000401121150.A18158@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <000201bf9c8b$a6655830$21c9ca95@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <slrn8ee8jt.ic6.mason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Apr 2, 10:35am, Geoff Wing wrote:
} Subject: Re: sourceforge.net CVS tree ready for use
}
} Symbolic names with two numbers (one dot) are names on the main branch
} (i.e. static tags). Those with four (or six or eight ...) numbers are
} branch tags.
However, CVS only assigns new branch numbers when absolutely necessary,
so there may be files on the main trunk that have four or more numbers
in their revision.
IIRC, Tanaka was maintaining his repository entirely as "cvs import"s of
a master patch tree. Thus before PWS's commit, every file in the whole
repository appeared to be on the "vendor branch." Now, only those files
that PWS updated (patches between 10250 and 10376, so far) have trunk
revision numbers (mostly 1.2) while the rest still appear to be on the
branch (even though you get them with a main trunk checkout).
Confused enough yet?
--
Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author