Gennaro Prota wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 14:30:16 -0500, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot@gmail.com> wrote:
Gennaro Prota wrote:
[...] I can imagine one reason for objection: multifile commits; since CVS doesn't have a commit or rollback logic, if one of the files isn't checked in, say, because of tabs you have to manually figure out the new status of the repository.
As far as I understand from the SF docs, this is a non-issue, as the script is applied before any file is committed.
SF docs are terrible at explaining CVS issues ;-) Pre and post commit scripts in CVS are on a per directory basis. So it is possible that files in one dir would be OK while it would fail in the next. Note, I know this from experience, not from any CVS docs I've seen.
[...] I can only remember one other right now. And it's a deployment issue. We would have to match the compiled inspect program to the CVS servers that SF uses.
It looks like this is transparent to the user:
Not sure what you mean by transparent in this case. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo