"Ansley, Michael" <Michael.Ansley@intec.co.za> writes:
> What is the ideal setup to have when contributing to PG development? I can
> always just download the latest CVS tree, and then presumably run diff when
> I want to send something in.
> However, my understanding is that using CVSup allows me to replicate the cvs
> tree into my own repository, which I then check out/update/commit from/to.
AFAIK, the main advantage of CVSup is that you have a complete copy of
the CVS archive on your own machine, which means you can examine cvs
commit log messages, pull old versions, and so forth without having
to contact hub.org. If you just use "cvs update" periodically then
you only have the current sources, and have to use remote cvs to do
things like checking log messages.
If you've got the disk space to spare for the full archives, and have
a fairly slow link to hub.org, then a local archive is worthwhile.
I am not sure of the implications of trying to commit into your own
copy of the archive when you are using CVSup. I would think that
the commits might get lost at next CVSup run ... can anyone who uses
CVSup clarify?
Personally I use the "cvs update" method because I don't have a lot
of disk space to spare for Postgres work, and I don't mind using
remote cvs operations to get at the logs...
cvs update is pretty good about merging changes from the repository
into files that you have changed locally. Dunno how well that works
with CVSup. Probably you have to do a local "cvs update" into your
working files after each CVSup run, and the net result on the work
files is just the same.
regards, tom lane