[cvsnt] Re: Branch merging - this seems wrong...

[Tony Eva]

Gerhard Fiedler wrote: 
> I really think that both approaches (Tony Hoyle's comments 
> about merge points and our need to have temporary development 
> branches that stay in sync with the main development branch) 
> converge in my suggestion to only merge from A to B, and 
> after the final merge from A to B, /copy/ B to A.

Yes, that's right.  This is really just a matter of semantics,
really, since the copy is just a special case of a merge where
the merge target has not changed since the merge point.
In the absence of a better solution it's the only way I can
see to move forwards.

> What you might want here is a "branch copy"
> command, but that can easily be done with a script. 

It's easy to see how this could be done with a temporary
file:

(assume file.c is modified and committed on BranchB)
cp file.c file.c.tmp
cvs update -r BranchA file.c
cp file.c.tmp file.c
cvs commit file.c

...but is there a neater way to do it without hacky temp
files?

-- 
Tony