In message <19991215225652.A7503@fundy.ca>David Maxwell writes

>On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 06:15:39PM -0500, Greg Hudson wrote:
>> People prefer to do the copies so that you can see all of the revision
>> information about a file in one place, independent of what location it
>> has been in over time.  It's not about saving work up front.
>
>Ok, that part sounds alright - that's a stylistic decision.

Well, more an engineering decision, but yes..

>> If you set all of the revisions to state "dead", everything should
>> work.  (Oh, and check in a new revision which isn't dead, of course.)
>
>And is that what the process currently used on the NetBSD repository
>involves?

Yes (at least it did lasttime I used it).  And all tags are stripped
out of the new version, so it doesn't magically appear on some tagged
branch.


>> People looking at the log will be mostly able to tell what revisions
>> of the file correspond to an old location, although they can't
>
>But things will be ok if I want to check out the whole tree, for
>NetBSD 1.2, with all files in their correct locations?

Yes. The old, original files are still in the Attic, so when you ask
for an old tag, theys how up.  Files moved in the repository don't
show up, beause the tags were stripped as part of the copy.

I havent tried checking out stuff by date; that might result in the
`repository-copied' files unexpectedly showing up at the new
locations, in the state the `original' file was in at that date.
But tagged branches, (e.g., each release) are hunky-dory.

[...]