Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v6.5 - Tagged

Works for me...its now tag'd and branched :)


On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 13, 1999 at 03:26:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > > On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Er, don't you need to make a branch, not just tags?
> > 
> > > Ya know something, after all these years, I'm still not 100% of the
> > > difference between the two :(
> > 
> > I'm not either ... I just saw that cvs log was reporting it differently
> > than it did for the REL6_4 stuff.
> 
> My understanding is that a tag is just a convenient way to cluster a
> set of file versions so they can be checked out together. In practice,
> it's usually synonymous with using a particular -D date flag.
> 
> A branch, on the other hand, allows the dreaded double patching - the
> branch can now evolve independently of the trunk, perhaps to be merged
> later, perhaps not. If you double patch, no need to merge, just abandon
> the branch when it gets too different.
> 
> Ross 
> (This is, of course, just my understanding, not backed by years of using
> CVS in a branching environment)
> 
> -- 
> Ross J. Reedstrom, Ph.D., <reedstrm@rice.edu> 
> NSBRI Research Scientist/Programmer
> Computer and Information Technology Institute
> Rice University, 6100 S. Main St.,  Houston, TX 77005
> 

Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org