> I think "doesn't restore timestamps correctly" is a little bit too strong, > but > I agree that timestamps are painful.
As an example, we had some very unhappy customers after shipping a version of comctl32.dll with an incorrect timestamp due to CVS' (non-existant) timestamp handling. I've used several other revision control managers, and all of them honored the timestamp of the file, rather than clobbering it with the time that the file was checked in. > Just my 2 cents: Tag your code (cvs tag tag_name) reasonably often (for > example once you code is working - tag it). We maintain about 200k lines > code > with about 20 developers and this technique proved to be quite helpful. I > also find time stamps much less convenient than tags. (You have to scratch > your head trying to remember when was the last time your code was actually > running). I might add to this that you should make those tags branches, otherwise you'll have to re-tag the code if you ever want to do concurrent development (or go back and fix bugs in a stable release while working on a non-stable one). -Jon Burchmore
