On 2002-02-22 at 1256.39 +0100, Sven Neumann typed this mail: > Hi, > > Carol Spears <cspears@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > tonight i decided to try the cvs gimp-1.3. i found it very difficult to > > convince the cvs server that i wanted the new gimp now, having followed > > bex's how to for the stable gimp. > > > > eventually i renamed the gimp directory and was able to successfully > > check it out, it seems like there should be a more elegant method to do > > this. > > what did you do? Tried to convert the stable checkout into the HEAD > branch? The branch tags in your stable CVS checkout are sticky, that > means they apply even though you don't specify them directly. There > are ways to work around this (use cvs update -A, see cvs --help update) > but in the case of The GIMP I'd suggest you do a fresh checkout since > we have moved so many files that upgrading CVS from stable to unstable > doesn't really make sense. > nope, i didn't try to convert anything, i wanted both branches. what i did to be able to get the unstable branch was to change the name of the module for the stable branch from "gimp" to "stable" and checked out simply "gimp" this time. it totally worked. but ususally when i change the name of something to get it to work, i can hear the laughter in the background .... hence my question about having a more elegant way to tell cvs what i would like. > > i also noticed that when i "cvs checkout gimp" i only got the unstable > > branch .... > > sure, unstable is the HEAD branch, that is the default branch you get > when checking out without explicitely specifying a branch. This is the > intended behaviour. Development always continues in the HEAD branch, > and at certain points stable versions (like gimp-1-0, gimp-1-2) are > branched off. > everything worked just fine. when i read --help checkout and --help update last night, it looked like i might cvs update -d gimp-stable -r gimp-1-2 gimp and that might update the stable branch in the new directory name, but in the light of day this doesn't work. i will continue to rename the modules as i update them, since it worked fine. i just thought there would be a more elegant way to do it. thanks for you time carol
