
Tagged with a release tag of 'REL6_5' ...


Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 


Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:23:15 -0300 (ADT)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
PostgreSQL v6.5 - Tagged 
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> Tagged with a release tag of 'REL6_5' ...

Er, don't you need to make a branch, not just tags?

			regards, tom lane

Tue, 13 Jul 1999 11:33:23 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v6.5 - Tagged 
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Tom Lane wrote:

> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > Tagged with a release tag of 'REL6_5' ...
> 
> Er, don't you need to make a branch, not just tags?

Ya know something, after all these years, I'm still not 100% of the
difference between the two :(

I just 'branched' the tree off of the REL6_5 tag...personally, unless you
get into multiple branches off of a tree at one tag point, I don't *think*
that the branch is required, but, hell, better safe then sorry...

Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 


Tue, 13 Jul 1999 15:11:21 -0300 (ADT)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v6.5 - Tagged 
> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> > The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > > Tagged with a release tag of 'REL6_5' ...
> > 
> > Er, don't you need to make a branch, not just tags?
> 
> Ya know something, after all these years, I'm still not 100% of the
> difference between the two :(
> 
> I just 'branched' the tree off of the REL6_5 tag...personally, unless you
> get into multiple branches off of a tree at one tag point, I don't *think*
> that the branch is required, but, hell, better safe then sorry...

OK, I am snagging the REL6_5 branch now.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Tue, 13 Jul 1999 14:43:07 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v6.5 - Tagged
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Er, don't you need to make a branch, not just tags?

> Ya know something, after all these years, I'm still not 100% of the
> difference between the two :(

I'm not either ... I just saw that cvs log was reporting it differently
than it did for the REL6_4 stuff.

			regards, tom lane

Tue, 13 Jul 1999 15:26:22 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v6.5 - Tagged 
On Tue, Jul 13, 1999 at 03:26:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Er, don't you need to make a branch, not just tags?
> 
> > Ya know something, after all these years, I'm still not 100% of the
> > difference between the two :(
> 
> I'm not either ... I just saw that cvs log was reporting it differently
> than it did for the REL6_4 stuff.

My understanding is that a tag is just a convenient way to cluster a
set of file versions so they can be checked out together. In practice,
it's usually synonymous with using a particular -D date flag.

A branch, on the other hand, allows the dreaded double patching - the
branch can now evolve independently of the trunk, perhaps to be merged
later, perhaps not. If you double patch, no need to merge, just abandon
the branch when it gets too different.

Ross 
(This is, of course, just my understanding, not backed by years of using
CVS in a branching environment)

-- 
Ross J. Reedstrom, Ph.D., <reedstrm@rice.edu> 
NSBRI Research Scientist/Programmer
Computer and Information Technology Institute
Rice University, 6100 S. Main St.,  Houston, TX 77005

Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:00:55 -0500
"Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@wallace.ece.rice.edu>
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v6.5 - Tagged

Works for me...its now tag'd and branched :)


On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 13, 1999 at 03:26:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > > On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Er, don't you need to make a branch, not just tags?
> > 
> > > Ya know something, after all these years, I'm still not 100% of the
> > > difference between the two :(
> > 
> > I'm not either ... I just saw that cvs log was reporting it differently
> > than it did for the REL6_4 stuff.
> 
> My understanding is that a tag is just a convenient way to cluster a
> set of file versions so they can be checked out together. In practice,
> it's usually synonymous with using a particular -D date flag.
> 
> A branch, on the other hand, allows the dreaded double patching - the
> branch can now evolve independently of the trunk, perhaps to be merged
> later, perhaps not. If you double patch, no need to merge, just abandon
> the branch when it gets too different.
> 
> Ross 
> (This is, of course, just my understanding, not backed by years of using
> CVS in a branching environment)
> 
> -- 
> Ross J. Reedstrom, Ph.D., <reedstrm@rice.edu> 
> NSBRI Research Scientist/Programmer
> Computer and Information Technology Institute
> Rice University, 6100 S. Main St.,  Houston, TX 77005
> 

Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 


Tue, 13 Jul 1999 19:19:05 -0300 (ADT)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v6.5 - Tagged