Re: Image_Text mess in CVS

<smith@backendmedia.com> wrote : > <snip> > > I generally develop in my CVS dir because this makes it easy for me to check > my changes with the current and older versions in CVS. I also develop on > windows and so I can really feel Toby's pain. Actually I think what Toby was > trying to do is the way to go. I didn't think this would be such a huge > thing. It doesn't break the golden rule really, because the "breakage" is so > easy to see through. > > Anyways the current CVS structure is there to allow fine grained ACL's on > packages. This is all fine and dandy, but I don't see why this has to mean > you need to move files around or requiring people to add softlinks to > windows (which is a common enough development platform among pear-dev). > > So all in all I think what Toby is doing is a valid method. If you need one > true standard than I would infact prefer Toby's method to become the > standard (with the fixed file names of course). Could we have something from the PEAR Group about this issue. I have followed the thread on PEAR's future and it looks like there are more important things to fix without the need to change the CVS structure. Individual decisions taken for "personal use" are affecting the whole community here. The way you work with CVS does not reflect the way I and others work with CVS. I suppose this should also be taken into consideration before making a decision. (AFAIK, Windows allow drag & drop now, so why don't you just copy your files manually from the CVS to your test directory, modify them and commit your changes when it's done ?) Bertrand Mansion Mamasam