CVS update question

[Emmanuel Gravel]

All of what you said makes a lot of sense. However
I'm just trying to keep as many things as possible
exactly the way they are (resistance to change here).
Once the developpment has migrated to a better
platform
than the one we're using, it'll be easier to recommend
better revision control practices. Until then...

BTW, I didn't figure out how to properly use the -c
tag on rcs with cvs, but I figured out how to make
cvs update give me what I wanted: add a * before the
$Log entry, and it'll work like a charm :)

Thanks for your help!

Emmanuel
--- Kevin Buettner <kev@primenet.com> wrote:
> On May 15, 11:06am, Emmanuel Gravel wrote:
> 
> > I'm testing cross-compatibility between two
> versions
> > of CVS (1.10 on Linux and 1.3 on a very old
> system,
> > can't update it so we're stuck). The question I
> have
> > is with regards to the newer version though.
> > 
> > On the 1.3, a cvs update would yield ' * '
> prepending
> > $Log entries (space, *, space). In the newer
> version
> > there is nothing. I was told it may be some RCS
> config
> > to be modified but I haven't been able to find
> > anything
> > about this in the docs, and haven't found anything
> in
> > the config of 1.3 (no .cvsrc or other local config
> > files) or env on that system that would indicate
> any
> > parameters modified for this behaviour. I'm trying
> to
> > emulate it under Linux with 1.10. Anyone know what
> I
> > should be looking for?
> 
> It looks to me like David has answered your question
> so I have nothing
> to add with regard to the specifics of your
> question.
> 
> But I do have a remark to make about the use of $Log
> in general. 
> Simply put, I think the use of $Log is a very bad
> idea.  Here
> are my reasons:
> 
>     1) It clutters up your source files.  If you
> don't prune your
>        log messages occassionally, you'll end up
> with more lines
>        of log messages than lines of source code.
> 
>     2) It makes merging of branches much more
> difficult since your
>        log entries will result in conflicts.  (Even
> $Header causes
>        conflicts.  I don't like $Header either, but
> I find $Header
>        marginally easier to justify than $Log.)
> 
>     3) It makes it harder to generate useful diffs. 
> (Whoever gets
>        the diffs will likely have to remove the $Log
> portions first.
>        And this can be hard if the $Log hunk
> overlaps some real changes.)
> 
>     4) If you commit a bunch of files at once, you
> get the same
>        log entry put in each file.  If you do a
> decent job of
>        describing exactly what's been changed, this
> results
>        in a lot of replicated text in each file.
> 
>     5) The log information is available separately
> via "cvs log". 
>        IMO, this is much more useful than storing
> the log information
>        in the file.
> 
> I much prefer GNU-style ChangeLog files for
> recording the changes
> which were made to a project.  They have the
> advantage of being a
> separate file that is checked into and maintained
> apart from your
> source control database.  This means that your
> change information is
> available if you do a "cvs export" or if you decide
> to use different
> source code control software.  Also, and more
> importantly, the
> change information for related files is grouped
> together in one place
> so that if a change to foo.c is made, you can see
> the reason for it
> by examining the surrounding ChangeLog entries.
> 
> Kevin
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Plug-discuss mailing list  - 
> Plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
>
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/