You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Ben Reser <be...@reser.org> on 2015/02/24 18:52:59 UTC
Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
I know that Bert has made a lot of changes he'd like to include in 1.9 on
trunk. At this point since we haven't cut a release candidate I'd like to
propose that we just do a catchup merge excluding anything we really don't
want. I believe at this point that would just be the version bumpage.
Thoughts?
Re: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com>.
On 27.02.2015 23:44, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Branko Čibej [mailto:brane@wandisco.com]
>> Sent: vrijdag 27 februari 2015 21:05
>> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
>>
>> On 24.02.2015 21:49, Bert Huijben wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ben Reser [mailto:ben@reser.org]
>>>> Sent: dinsdag 24 februari 2015 18:53
>>>> To: Subversion Development
>>>> Subject: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
>>>>
>>>> I know that Bert has made a lot of changes he'd like to include in 1.9 on
>>>> trunk. At this point since we haven't cut a release candidate I'd like to
>>>> propose that we just do a catchup merge excluding anything we really don't
>>>> want. I believe at this point that would just be the version bumpage.
>>> +1
>>>
>>> I hadn't expect this much agreement, or I wouldn't have spent the day cutting
>> the changes into backport suggestions. Luckily that is a good way to review your
>> own changes...
>>
>> Bert, I think we're more or less waiting for you to say you're ready to
>> do the catch-up merge.
> I don't expect any really big things to happen soon. (Or I must find something serious again :( )
>
> That status didn't support some tree conflicts is a really nasty problem, that also affects 1.8.x.
> (And as our conflict resolver and commit both use status as their source, we just forgot to update moves and nobody noticed)
>
> I found some cases where 'svn delete' overly aggressive removes all conflicts (even from layers unaffected by the delete), but I don't think we have to wait for that.
I interpret that as "+1" and did the catch-up merge in r1662916.
1.9.x is now closed for backports except release blockers until we roll
the Beta.
-- Brane
RE: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
Posted by Bert Huijben <be...@qqmail.nl>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Branko Čibej [mailto:brane@wandisco.com]
> Sent: vrijdag 27 februari 2015 21:05
> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
>
> On 24.02.2015 21:49, Bert Huijben wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Ben Reser [mailto:ben@reser.org]
> >> Sent: dinsdag 24 februari 2015 18:53
> >> To: Subversion Development
> >> Subject: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
> >>
> >> I know that Bert has made a lot of changes he'd like to include in 1.9 on
> >> trunk. At this point since we haven't cut a release candidate I'd like to
> >> propose that we just do a catchup merge excluding anything we really don't
> >> want. I believe at this point that would just be the version bumpage.
> > +1
> >
> > I hadn't expect this much agreement, or I wouldn't have spent the day cutting
> the changes into backport suggestions. Luckily that is a good way to review your
> own changes...
>
> Bert, I think we're more or less waiting for you to say you're ready to
> do the catch-up merge.
I don't expect any really big things to happen soon. (Or I must find something serious again :( )
That status didn't support some tree conflicts is a really nasty problem, that also affects 1.8.x.
(And as our conflict resolver and commit both use status as their source, we just forgot to update moves and nobody noticed)
I found some cases where 'svn delete' overly aggressive removes all conflicts (even from layers unaffected by the delete), but I don't think we have to wait for that.
Bert
Re: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com>.
On 24.02.2015 21:49, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ben Reser [mailto:ben@reser.org]
>> Sent: dinsdag 24 februari 2015 18:53
>> To: Subversion Development
>> Subject: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
>>
>> I know that Bert has made a lot of changes he'd like to include in 1.9 on
>> trunk. At this point since we haven't cut a release candidate I'd like to
>> propose that we just do a catchup merge excluding anything we really don't
>> want. I believe at this point that would just be the version bumpage.
> +1
>
> I hadn't expect this much agreement, or I wouldn't have spent the day cutting the changes into backport suggestions. Luckily that is a good way to review your own changes...
Bert, I think we're more or less waiting for you to say you're ready to
do the catch-up merge.
-- Brane
RE: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
Posted by Bert Huijben <be...@qqmail.nl>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Reser [mailto:ben@reser.org]
> Sent: dinsdag 24 februari 2015 18:53
> To: Subversion Development
> Subject: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
>
> I know that Bert has made a lot of changes he'd like to include in 1.9 on
> trunk. At this point since we haven't cut a release candidate I'd like to
> propose that we just do a catchup merge excluding anything we really don't
> want. I believe at this point that would just be the version bumpage.
+1
I hadn't expect this much agreement, or I wouldn't have spent the day cutting the changes into backport suggestions. Luckily that is a good way to review your own changes...
Bert
>
> Thoughts?
Re: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@btopenworld.com>.
Branko Čibej wrote:
> Ben Reser wrote:
>> I know that Bert has made a lot of changes he'd like to include in 1.9 on
>> trunk. At this point since we haven't cut a release candidate I'd like to
>> propose that we just do a catchup merge excluding anything we really don't
>> want. I believe at this point that would just be the version bumpage.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> Ack, +1
+1 -- as far as I know, all changes have been stabilization or simple safe changes.
+1 on including the contents of the 'svn-info-detail' branch too, if that makes it to trunk in time.
- Julian
Re: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
Posted by Philip Martin <ph...@wandisco.com>.
Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com> writes:
> On 24.02.2015 18:52, Ben Reser wrote:
>> I know that Bert has made a lot of changes he'd like to include in 1.9 on
>> trunk. At this point since we haven't cut a release candidate I'd like to
>> propose that we just do a catchup merge excluding anything we really don't
>> want. I believe at this point that would just be the version bumpage.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> Ack, +1
+1
--
Philip Martin | Subversion Committer
WANdisco // *Non-Stop Data*
Re: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com>.
On 24.02.2015 18:52, Ben Reser wrote:
> I know that Bert has made a lot of changes he'd like to include in 1.9 on
> trunk. At this point since we haven't cut a release candidate I'd like to
> propose that we just do a catchup merge excluding anything we really don't
> want. I believe at this point that would just be the version bumpage.
>
> Thoughts?
Ack, +1