CVS tags

[Christopher Faylor]

On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 02:06:21PM -0400, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>On Sun, 12 Oct 2003, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> writes:
>> > On Sun, 12 Oct 2003, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>> >> IIRC, if you merge against anything other than a tag you'll lose
>> >> track of removed files.  (I hope to be corrected.)
>> >
>> > Hmm, if that's indeed the case, we could avoid the "exploding number
>> > of tags" syndrome by keeping a _moving_ tag for such merges, much like
>> > the gcc_latest_snapshot tag we used to have:
>>
>> We could also just get rid of old merge tags from time to time.  That has
>> the advantage that we still can keep a few merge tags for testing purpose.
>
>FWIW, that seems better than a moving tag: you can then rely on
>the tag being stable; it might be gone but it doesn't suddenly
>change contents (for various values of "sudden").

The last time I suggested deleting tags there was an objection, IIRC.
Something about losing valuable data for future software historians,
I think...

I think that cleaning up the old tags is a great idea, though.  Just
don't do it to branch tags or you leave orphaned revisions in the cvs
file.

cgf