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.
Tags are not good enough, if there is no way to specify a specific historical version then there is no way to apply a tag to anything but the current head or branch tip. Furthermore if the only way to get at historical revisions are tags you'd totaly lose access to any version without a tag which seems like a bad idea to me. Matt S. "Rick Genter" <rgenter at silverlink.com> wrote in message news:mailman.202.1122050465.448.cvsnt at cvsnt.org... > -----Original Message----- > From: cvsnt-bounces at cvsnt.org [mailto:cvsnt-bounces at cvsnt.org] On Behalf Of Matt Schuckmann > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 12:31 PM > To: cvsnt at cvsnt.org cvsnt downloads at march-hare.com @CVSNT on Twitter CVSNT on Facebook > Subject: [cvsnt] Re: "cvs commit -r " problem > > > I've heard people on this board say exactly what Bo said many times and it > bothers me. > While I agree that there is rarely (possibly never) any reason for a user to > require a specific revision number I don't agree that revision numbers are > strictly internal. > They are a way of refering to a historical version of the file, the most > common use of them might be for a code review in which the reviewee tells > the reviewers to look at specific revisions of specific files. If the > revision numbers are going to go away in the future how will we refer to > specific historical versions of a file? > > Matt S. Tags. _______________________________________________ cvsnt mailing list cvsnt at cvsnt.org cvsnt downloads at march-hare.com @CVSNT on Twitter CVSNT on Facebook http://www.cvsnt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cvsnt https://www.march-hare.com/cvspro/en.asp#downcvs