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.
Gerhard Fiedler wrote: > I really think that both approaches (Tony Hoyle's comments > about merge points and our need to have temporary development > branches that stay in sync with the main development branch) > converge in my suggestion to only merge from A to B, and > after the final merge from A to B, /copy/ B to A. Yes, that's right. This is really just a matter of semantics, really, since the copy is just a special case of a merge where the merge target has not changed since the merge point. In the absence of a better solution it's the only way I can see to move forwards. > What you might want here is a "branch copy" > command, but that can easily be done with a script. It's easy to see how this could be done with a temporary file: (assume file.c is modified and committed on BranchB) cp file.c file.c.tmp cvs update -r BranchA file.c cp file.c.tmp file.c cvs commit file.c ...but is there a neater way to do it without hacky temp files? -- Tony