Jay Glanville writes:
Do you mean, that if the old SCM had given the revision id of 10 to
a.c and 11 to b.c, that in P4 I simply treat these files as text, not
text+k, and ignore their values?
If so, then this totally throws out the concepts of keyword substitution.
No, it makes $Revision$ into an accurate reflection of one SCM's state,
ignoring the other.
You can't have two incompatible systems stick the same information into
the same keyword, so you have three options:
1. Make one system rename its $Revision$ keyword.
2. Make one of them stop using $Revision$ at all.
3. Make the keyword unreliable (because any single instance may
represent one system or may represent the other).
I don't know any way to make perforce support option 1, but perhaps the
other SCM can do that? Option 2 is easy. Option 3 would defeat the idea
of keywords, IMHO.
Arnt
_______________________________________________
perforce-user mailing list - perforce-user@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://maillist.perforce.com/mailman/listinfo/perforce-user
|
Try Searching:
servers, voip, java, networking, microsoft ...
|
|
|
| 
