[PATCH] document CVS vs. git tags
From: Matthias Urlichs <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:42:02
Subsystem:
documentation, the rest · Maintainers:
Jonathan Corbet, Linus Torvalds
CVS uses tags for lots of things. Git doesn't. Document that, so people may understand.
diff --git a/Documentation/cvs-migration.txt b/Documentation/cvs-migration.txt
--- a/Documentation/cvs-migration.txt
+++ b/Documentation/cvs-migration.txt@@ -230,3 +230,33 @@ that contain this changed "if" statement [ Side note. This option is called "--pickaxe-all" because -S option is internally called "pickaxe", a tool for software archaeologists.] + + + +Tagging, Branching and Merging +------------------------------ + +In CVS, you need tags for three different (and conflicting) use cases: + +* Mark the state of you repository at a given point in time. + + "This is version 0.2." + +* Name a branch, i.e. semi-separate line of development. + + "I'm now working on what's going to be version 0.3." + +* Remember where you last merged from so that you won't mess up your + changes later. + + "Did we integrate that important bugfix from 0.2.1 into 0.3 yet?" + + +Git has different features for each of these uses. + +* You mark the current (actually, last-checked-in) state with "git tag". + +* You start a new branch with "git checkout -b <name>". + +* Git keeps track of what-got-merged-to-where internally. +