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 sales@march-hare.com.
Tony Hoyle <tmh at nodomain.org> writes: > Oliver Koltermann wrote: > > > I forgot to mention that this worked for me with all older versions of > > cvsnt. I can't say which version was the latest, but I have no problem > > with CVSNT 1.11.1.3 b72. So I'm sorry that I have to disagree on > > this. We used this functionality all the time - there must have been > > some recent changes which broke it. > > If it worked it was by accident... it couldn't possibly have been correct... > even the manual documents that it gets the paths wrong - the client has to > deal with that crap itself (which admittedly it seems to manage as it's > fairly robust). > > Making a 'clean' solution is going to take some time & testing, as it > involves some quite hairy changes. Hello Tony, in the ChangeLog you write 2003-04-01 15:45 tmh * cvsnt.vcproj, src/annotate.c, src/checkout.c, src/client.c, src/cvs.h, src/log.c, src/ls.c, src/modules.c, src/patch.c, src/server.c, src/tag.c, cvsnt.vcproj, src/checkout.c, cvsnt.vcproj, src/checkout.c, src/server.c: Rewrite co -d handling. I don't like doing this so close to a release but it's becoming a FAQ and I'm fed up with it. That was release candidate 5 (3 days before the release). I don't know much about how cvs works in detail. Especially I don't understand the ampersand modules handling. I try to browse through the code and gather information, but I'm not familiar enough with it to be of help. I understand that it worked by some kind of magic in the old releases. I don't know if it was intentionally or by chance. I'm sure that the new handling of checkout -d is better than the former, but in my eyes it's incomplete. It doesn't provide an essential functionality that was available with the old code and that users may rely on. So when there are further hairy changes needed to get back to the stable state, I think this should go on in the development version. I was really happy about the new version numbering scheme just startet. It brought back the kind of safe feeling about a release. I lived through the up's and down's of the 1.11.1.3 builds and always hated the decision "Is it better to update or does this introduce new problems?". Please don't misunderstand me, but this change disappointed my new hope to always know which release is best to distribute to the developers. You're doing a really good job and indeed improving cvsnt over the original unix version. And you made cvs more usable, integrating and interconnecting in a windows environment. I think changes are good, but as cvsnt evolutes in big steps it is also important to have stable settle points. For me 2.0.0rc4 is the stable point I use now. Sorry for the long explanation. You invest so many time in the project that my effort to select the right version fades. Thank you for all the work! I hope it will get even more distributed as soon as the new version numbers have stabilized. Best wishes, OK.