Re: cvs2svn, vendor branches, and missing default branch

On 01/05/2015 09:11 AM, john hood wrote:
> On 1/3/15 4:32 PM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> [...]
>> Given your description of the problem and of CVS's behavior, I don't see
>> how we can justify treating vendor branch revisions as HEAD branch
>> revisions if there is no 1.2 revision to tell when to switch back to
>> HEAD (i.e., I think this change would be justified in general, not just
>> in your special case).
> I confess to some unease about the simple fix though it seems to work. 
> There was some case I was concerned about when I was looking through the
> source, but I've forgotten what it was now.

If you can think of a reason not to make this change, please let me
know. I can't think of one, but you might very well have more hands-on
experience with vendor branches than I do.

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
[email protected]

------------------------------------------------------
http://cvs2svn.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1670&dsMessageId=3093734

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [[email protected]].