[cvsnt] Re: Latest Updates

[keith d. zimmerman]

well, if i am not mistaken, it came from my question originally.  And if 
this is supported, I no longer need the HEAD:date syntax:
	cvs update -j DATE -j HEAD
but that doesn't work either.  Thus the HEAD:date thing makes sense to me.

Oliver Giesen wrote:
> John Kinson wrote:
> 
> 
>>Outside of CVS as you know, HEAD usually indicates a revision, and
>>TRUNK or MAIN indicates the branch.  But to introduce a new (more
>>accurate) name for the trunk to CVSnt would probably confuse more
>>users than it would benefit, IMHO.
> 
> 
> Granted I could possibly live without that for a little longer too but
> by the way that Tony introduced the -rHEAD:date syntax, he has
> explicitly made HEAD semantically a branch. This new syntax doesn't
> make sense to me. Either I want the head revision or I want a revision
> from a specified date. I can't have both (unless the date matches the
> head revision).
> 
> Maybe this could have better been resolved by adding a new option to
> enforce checkout from the default branch only. This would for instance
> be consistent with how Log handles this problem. Unfortunately update
> -b is already taken as an option...
> 
> Cheers,
>