Re: What is keeping GDB in CVS ?

["Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>]

On Sat, 20 Jun 2009, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> You're reading more into what I wrote than I intended.  I wasn't
> proposing any trickery.  I'm just saying that, IMO, if a group of files
> is shared between projects the shared group of files should be stored in
> their own repository.
> 
> I haven't used git so maybe it adds extra wrinkles but I can't see how
> it would be THAT hard to accommodate keeping things in separate
> directories.  You can either use symlinks, or, 'source' lines in shell
> scripts and 'include' lines in Makefiles.

It seems quite clear to me that all these files should be automatically 
tagged when the projects using them are tagged and branched when those 
projects are branched and the tagged or branched versions should be 
checked out automatically when the tag or branch is checked out.  You can 
of course invent systems for tagging or branching in multiple 
repositories, but if you require people to do something that's not the 
normal way of using whatever version control system is used then trouble 
will inevitably result (cf. the present issues with not being able to use 
"cvs update -d" as normal in the present arrangements).  As I said in the 
binutils discussion, version control systems should make common tasks easy 
and mistakes in common tasks difficult.  (This suggests allowing commits 
to the shared files anywhere and automatically merging everywhere else 
behind the scenes as the friendliest arrangement even if harder to 
implement.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com