|
From: <jer...@xt...> - 2004-07-29 07:31:16
|
Colin Sampaleanu wrote: > Jérôme BERNARD wrote: > >> Colin Sampaleanu wrote: >> >>> Dmitriy Kopylenko wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>> I like id keywords...they're mainly in the code through my classes or >>>>> classes I've edited... (Damn, if it's standardized, I won't know >>>>> if I've >>>>> worked on a particular file any more :-) >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I also insert $Id:$ when I work on existing classes or create new >>>> ones ;-) >>>> >>>> Dmitriy. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I personally like $Id tags. But they do suck big time when trying to >>> merge files back in after a branch, causing a conflict/change to >>> exist when there shouldn't be any... There seems to be a trend to >>> going away from using them in files, by some people, for this reason. >> >> >> >> Simply use the "-kk" option. >> Have a look at: http://www.loria.fr/~molli/cvs/doc/cvs_toc.html#TOC96 >> Keywords are not an issue at all for branches & merges. >> > I think I'm missing something. If you just use -kk, then you don't get > any actual values substituted, only the keyword itself gets left in > there. Are you suggesting that for doing the merge, you check out both > branches with -kk, and then merge using those copies? Sort of a pain, > although it would work. > > Colin I should have sent this link instead http://www.rons.net.cn/htp/cvs/cvs_5.html#SEC64 :-) Basically, with the "-kk" option, it simply ignores the "expanded values". No need to checkout with "-kk". Jérôme. |