Re: CVS question

It is a bit of a tricky thing to select the correct approach.

Merging one into the other works, but requires all HEAD updates to go
via the merged branch to keep the branch tracking correct.

HEAD -> branch1 -> branch2

This way the code in branch2 is easily identifiable by comparing with
branch1, and branch1 by comparing with HEAD.

Creating a 3'rd branch might be more appropriate if development is done
in both 1 and 2, and you want to publish a "stable combined version",
but doing so requires some disipline in keeping the 3'rd branch up to
date, and the merge tools might not always help you there.. most of the
time they will, but sometimes there will be massive conflict indications
due to the HEAD updates coming from two directions...

/Henrik

Andres Kroonmaa wrote:
>
> Fellows, help a CVS newbie
>
> I've started 2 unrelated branches, both from HEAD.
> I do not need either branch in the other one to continue,
> but it would be useful for me to merge them.
>
> Q: should I create a 3rd branch where I merge both? Or is
> it ok to merge "useful" branch into my main branch, given that
> I wish to keep both public?
> "useful" branch modifies alot of files, although very slightly.
>
> What would you do?
>
> ------------------------------------
> Andres Kroonmaa <andre@online.ee>
> CTO, Delfi Online
> Tel: 6501 731, Fax: 6501 708
> Pärnu mnt. 158, Tallinn,
> 11317 Estonia
Received on Fri Apr 06 2001 - 17:28:53 MDT