Re: control-center reorganization in CVS

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

Chema Celorio <chema ximian com> writes:

> On 05 Jul 2001 16:44:52 +0200, Martin Baulig wrote:
> > And /me is still trying to understand why this rename was neccessarry at all.
> 
> I'll put a simple example (there where lots of cases like this)
> We had :
> 
> a) cvs/control-center/control-center/
> and
> b) cvs/control-center/new-control-center
> 
> We neeed to rename "b" and call it "a", but "a" is beeing used by the
> stable branch. There can only be one "control-center" directory in cvs.
> We had about 12 directories that had "-new" in their name. 

Not that it really helps, but in case this wasn't clear, the right
thing to do was not to create new-* directories in the first
place, but simply:

 a) Branch
 b) Change (remove and add files, etc.) the control-center/control-center
    directory in place.

Now, if you have a single branch in CVS with two different histories
for the same file, you are going to have to drastic measures
like creating a new module, or loose one of those histories,
but can we hope that this will never happen again?

Regards,
                                        Owen