You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@directory.apache.org by Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> on 2007/05/21 15:40:58 UTC
Re: svn commit: r539993 [1/2] - in /directory/apacheds/branches/kerberos-encryption-types: btree-base/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/core/partition/impl/btree/ constants/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/constants/ core-unit/src/te
Enrique,
On 5/20/07, erodriguez@apache.org <er...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Author: erodriguez
> Date: Sun May 20 18:53:07 2007
> New Revision: 539993
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=539993
> Log:
> Merged revisions r533844:539990 from ApacheDS trunk to
> 'kerberos-encryption-types' branch.
You seemed to have merged changes from the trunk to your branch. This is
going to now make it very
difficult if not impossible for you to merge your branch back into the
trunk. What's going to happen is
you'll get massive amounts of conflicts when you attempt to merge. Are you
sure you didn't instead
want to merge this branch into the trunk?
Alex
Re: svn commit: r539993 [1/2] - in /directory/apacheds/branches/kerberos-encryption-types: btree-base/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/core/partition/impl/btree/ constants/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/constants/ core-unit/src/te
Posted by Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@gmail.com>.
As Enrique is working on a part of the server which has not been changed
except from his own modification, I guess it won't be a big problem. Anyway,
it's better to be warned *before* than to try to fix big problems *after* :)
Emmanuel
On 5/21/07, Enrique Rodriguez <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/21/07, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Enrique,
> >
> > On 5/20/07, erodriguez@apache.org <erodriguez@apache.org > wrote:
> > > Author: erodriguez
> > > Date: Sun May 20 18:53:07 2007
> > > New Revision: 539993
> > >
> > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=539993
> > > Log:
> > > Merged revisions r533844:539990 from ApacheDS trunk to
> > 'kerberos-encryption-types' branch.
> >
> > You seemed to have merged changes from the trunk to your branch. This
> is
> > going to now make it very
> > difficult if not impossible for you to merge your branch back into the
> > trunk. What's going to happen is
> > you'll get massive amounts of conflicts when you attempt to merge. Are
> you
> > sure you didn't instead
> > want to merge this branch into the trunk?
>
> Hi, Alex,
>
> Thanks for reviewing my commits.
>
> This commit represents feature branch maintenance, straight out of the
> SVN redbook:
>
>
> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.commonuses.html#svn.branchmerge.commonuses.patterns.feature
>
> Not only is it good practice to keep a branch in sync with the trunk,
> I had to do so in this case because the branch failed to compile due
> to a change in a dependency.
>
> As for conflicts, I performed similar branch maintenance and merge
> back-to-trunk as recently as last week (on another project) and I'm
> confident I won't have the major issues you describe.
>
> Enrique
>
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
Re: svn commit: r539993 [1/2] - in /directory/apacheds/branches/kerberos-encryption-types: btree-base/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/core/partition/impl/btree/ constants/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/constants/ core-unit/src/te
Posted by Enrique Rodriguez <en...@gmail.com>.
On 5/21/07, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
> Oh good I hope I am wrong here. I guess SVN is smart enough to realized
> that you've
> applied these changes before. I just wanted to save you a hassle if that
> was in fact
> the case.
SVN needs some pointers to be smart enough, so the command syntax is
different between merging to a branch and rolling a branch back into
the trunk. When I complete the merge, I'll drop my command syntax to
the list. In short, the difference is peg vs. operative revision
syntax:
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/ch07s03.html
> If most of this work in the kerberos branch is done why don't you just go
> ahead and
> merge it to the trunk. This is not he sasl branch which has some big impact
> on the
> LDAP components I figure so go right ahead.
I wanted to complete some interop testing before merging, which is why
I needed to merge to the branch to get it to compile. I found two
bugs which broke TGS so I'm glad I did. That used up my weekend time.
I should get a chance to merge 'kerberos-encryption-types' tonight or
tomorrow night.
Enrique
Re: svn commit: r539993 [1/2] - in /directory/apacheds/branches/kerberos-encryption-types: btree-base/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/core/partition/impl/btree/ constants/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/constants/ core-unit/src/te
Posted by Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@gmail.com>.
Yes, I think Alex is right : commit the change in Trunks for kerberos
protocol.
Just be sure to support people on the list about this (there is again some
peep who try to get some info about kerberos ...).
At this point, I want to stress the fact that if people don't receive
support on some of the protocol w are suppose to support (like NTP, DNS,
Kerberos), we might find out what to do about it. I know this is a painfull
subject, but sandboxing such parts might be the solution until one more
committer can cope with the code. It would be sad, though, as we badly need
kerberos ! I guess that good doco, good tutorial and good tests are really
the only way to avoid such a move, but I'm pretty sure we are now moving on
the right direction (I saw a lot of commits with javadoco and Confluence
pages about kerberos).
Emmanuel
On 5/21/07, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Oh good I hope I am wrong here. I guess SVN is smart enough to realized
> that you've
> applied these changes before. I just wanted to save you a hassle if that
> was in fact
> the case.
>
> If most of this work in the kerberos branch is done why don't you just go
> ahead and
> merge it to the trunk. This is not he sasl branch which has some big
> impact on the
> LDAP components I figure so go right ahead.
>
> Alex
>
> On 5/21/07, Enrique Rodriguez <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 5/21/07, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Enrique,
> > >
> > > On 5/20/07, erodriguez@apache.org < erodriguez@apache.org > wrote:
> > > > Author: erodriguez
> > > > Date: Sun May 20 18:53:07 2007
> > > > New Revision: 539993
> > > >
> > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=539993
> > > > Log:
> > > > Merged revisions r533844:539990 from ApacheDS trunk to
> > > 'kerberos-encryption-types' branch.
> > >
> > > You seemed to have merged changes from the trunk to your branch. This
> > is
> > > going to now make it very
> > > difficult if not impossible for you to merge your branch back into the
> > > trunk. What's going to happen is
> > > you'll get massive amounts of conflicts when you attempt to
> > merge. Are you
> > > sure you didn't instead
> > > want to merge this branch into the trunk?
> >
> > Hi, Alex,
> >
> > Thanks for reviewing my commits.
> >
> > This commit represents feature branch maintenance, straight out of the
> > SVN redbook:
> >
> > http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.commonuses.html#svn.branchmerge.commonuses.patterns.feature
> >
> >
> > Not only is it good practice to keep a branch in sync with the trunk,
> > I had to do so in this case because the branch failed to compile due
> > to a change in a dependency.
> >
> > As for conflicts, I performed similar branch maintenance and merge
> > back-to-trunk as recently as last week (on another project) and I'm
> > confident I won't have the major issues you describe.
> >
> > Enrique
> >
>
>
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
Re: svn commit: r539993 [1/2] - in /directory/apacheds/branches/kerberos-encryption-types: btree-base/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/core/partition/impl/btree/ constants/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/constants/ core-unit/src/te
Posted by Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org>.
Oh good I hope I am wrong here. I guess SVN is smart enough to realized
that you've
applied these changes before. I just wanted to save you a hassle if that
was in fact
the case.
If most of this work in the kerberos branch is done why don't you just go
ahead and
merge it to the trunk. This is not he sasl branch which has some big impact
on the
LDAP components I figure so go right ahead.
Alex
On 5/21/07, Enrique Rodriguez <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/21/07, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Enrique,
> >
> > On 5/20/07, erodriguez@apache.org <erodriguez@apache.org > wrote:
> > > Author: erodriguez
> > > Date: Sun May 20 18:53:07 2007
> > > New Revision: 539993
> > >
> > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=539993
> > > Log:
> > > Merged revisions r533844:539990 from ApacheDS trunk to
> > 'kerberos-encryption-types' branch.
> >
> > You seemed to have merged changes from the trunk to your branch. This
> is
> > going to now make it very
> > difficult if not impossible for you to merge your branch back into the
> > trunk. What's going to happen is
> > you'll get massive amounts of conflicts when you attempt to merge. Are
> you
> > sure you didn't instead
> > want to merge this branch into the trunk?
>
> Hi, Alex,
>
> Thanks for reviewing my commits.
>
> This commit represents feature branch maintenance, straight out of the
> SVN redbook:
>
>
> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.commonuses.html#svn.branchmerge.commonuses.patterns.feature
>
> Not only is it good practice to keep a branch in sync with the trunk,
> I had to do so in this case because the branch failed to compile due
> to a change in a dependency.
>
> As for conflicts, I performed similar branch maintenance and merge
> back-to-trunk as recently as last week (on another project) and I'm
> confident I won't have the major issues you describe.
>
> Enrique
>
Re: svn commit: r539993 [1/2] - in /directory/apacheds/branches/kerberos-encryption-types: btree-base/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/core/partition/impl/btree/ constants/src/main/java/org/apache/directory/server/constants/ core-unit/src/te
Posted by Enrique Rodriguez <en...@gmail.com>.
On 5/21/07, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
> Enrique,
>
> On 5/20/07, erodriguez@apache.org <erodriguez@apache.org > wrote:
> > Author: erodriguez
> > Date: Sun May 20 18:53:07 2007
> > New Revision: 539993
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=539993
> > Log:
> > Merged revisions r533844:539990 from ApacheDS trunk to
> 'kerberos-encryption-types' branch.
>
> You seemed to have merged changes from the trunk to your branch. This is
> going to now make it very
> difficult if not impossible for you to merge your branch back into the
> trunk. What's going to happen is
> you'll get massive amounts of conflicts when you attempt to merge. Are you
> sure you didn't instead
> want to merge this branch into the trunk?
Hi, Alex,
Thanks for reviewing my commits.
This commit represents feature branch maintenance, straight out of the
SVN redbook:
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.commonuses.html#svn.branchmerge.commonuses.patterns.feature
Not only is it good practice to keep a branch in sync with the trunk,
I had to do so in this case because the branch failed to compile due
to a change in a dependency.
As for conflicts, I performed similar branch maintenance and merge
back-to-trunk as recently as last week (on another project) and I'm
confident I won't have the major issues you describe.
Enrique