You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu> on 2008/04/28 14:52:52 UTC

Re: svn commit: r30811 - branches/1.5.x

arfrever@tigris.org wrote:
  >   * Apply patch at,
>     http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=137828
>     Fixes compiler warning, which has been introduced while resolving the
>     conflict from merge of r30633 from trunk.
>     Votes: 
> -     +1 kameshj
> +     +1 kameshj, arfrever

Hmmm.  Instead of voting to apply the patch at that address, perhaps we 
should create a branch, apply the patch to the branch, and then vote on 
the branch?  It seems a bit easier for people to review, and a bit more 
inline with our process.  Of course, if we want to change the process, 
that's fine, too. :)

-Hyrum


Re: svn commit: r30811 - branches/1.5.x

Posted by Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com>.
"David Glasser" <gl...@davidglasser.net> writes:
>> > Kamesh Jayachandran wrote:
>>  I agree with you. But we should have 'exceptions to our rule' for
>>  trivial stuff like this one.
>
> +1

Gack -- yeah, also +1 on release manager (and for that matter, anyone
else) using their judgement about this stuff.  If we see a change go by
that someone claims is trivial and someone else thinks is not, then, via
the Magical Power of Auditing and Rollback, we can talk about it.  But
we shouldn't be so addicted to process that we impede trivial
improvements that pose no risk.  It's sometimes necessary to make minor
adjustments when merging, and we've never had a problem with that.

-Karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: svn commit: r30811 - branches/1.5.x

Posted by David Glasser <gl...@davidglasser.net>.
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Kamesh Jayachandran <ka...@collab.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
>  Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>
> > Kamesh Jayachandran wrote:
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>  >>> arfrever@tigris.org wrote:
>  >>>  >   * Apply patch at,
>  >>>>     http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=137828
>  >>>>     Fixes compiler warning, which has been introduced while
>  >>>> resolving the
>  >>>>     conflict from merge of r30633 from trunk.
>  >>>>     Votes: -     +1 kameshj
>  >>>> +     +1 kameshj, arfrever
>  >>> Hmmm.  Instead of voting to apply the patch at that address, perhaps we
>  >>> should create a branch, apply the patch to the branch, and then vote on
>  >>> the branch?  It seems a bit easier for people to review, and a bit more
>  >>> inline with our process.  Of course, if we want to change the process,
>  >>> that's fine, too. :)
>  >>
>
>  I agree with you. But we should have 'exceptions to our rule' for
>  trivial stuff like this one.

+1

--dave



-- 
David Glasser | glasser@davidglasser.net | http://www.davidglasser.net/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: svn commit: r30811 - branches/1.5.x

Posted by Kamesh Jayachandran <ka...@collab.net>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> Kamesh Jayachandran wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>>> arfrever@tigris.org wrote:
>>>  >   * Apply patch at,
>>>>     http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=137828
>>>>     Fixes compiler warning, which has been introduced while
>>>> resolving the
>>>>     conflict from merge of r30633 from trunk.
>>>>     Votes: -     +1 kameshj
>>>> +     +1 kameshj, arfrever
>>> Hmmm.  Instead of voting to apply the patch at that address, perhaps we
>>> should create a branch, apply the patch to the branch, and then vote on
>>> the branch?  It seems a bit easier for people to review, and a bit more
>>> inline with our process.  Of course, if we want to change the process,
>>> that's fine, too. :)
>>

I agree with you. But we should have 'exceptions to our rule' for
trivial stuff like this one.

With regards
Kamesh Jayachandran
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIFe0z3WHvyO0YTCwRAoV1AJ4+V2RuEylYLksXFrGejX/wKLOCAgCeLbpP
qfrIOk5tSMEdliFoTbURq50=
=+E4u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: svn commit: r30811 - branches/1.5.x

Posted by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>.
Kamesh Jayachandran wrote:
> 
> 
> Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>> arfrever@tigris.org wrote:
>>  >   * Apply patch at,
>>>     http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=137828
>>>     Fixes compiler warning, which has been introduced while resolving the
>>>     conflict from merge of r30633 from trunk.
>>>     Votes: -     +1 kameshj
>>> +     +1 kameshj, arfrever
>> Hmmm.  Instead of voting to apply the patch at that address, perhaps we
>> should create a branch, apply the patch to the branch, and then vote on
>> the branch?  It seems a bit easier for people to review, and a bit more
>> inline with our process.  Of course, if we want to change the process,
>> that's fine, too. :)
> 
> Why should we have short-lived-branch to track one trivial-item specific
> for 1.5.x alone and merge later, why not rather directly commit it after
> approval.

You're right, it's trivial and probably doesn't matter a whole lot. 
But...something just doesn't seem right about committing directly to a 
stabilization branch, particularly during the RC soak period.  I agree 
that the problem should be fixed, and that this patch looks like the 
right way to do it, I'm just questioning whether or not we should bend 
(or modify) our typical, albeit nebulous, process in this instance.

Branches are cheap, merging is easy, so why *not* create a short-lived 
branch to track this patch, just like we do with conflicting merges from 
trunk?

(That being said, do what you will.  I'm not going to veto this 
particular change, but I did want to express my concerns.)

-Hyrum


Re: svn commit: r30811 - branches/1.5.x

Posted by Kamesh Jayachandran <ka...@collab.net>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> arfrever@tigris.org wrote:
>  >   * Apply patch at,
>>     http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=137828
>>     Fixes compiler warning, which has been introduced while resolving the
>>     conflict from merge of r30633 from trunk.
>>     Votes: -     +1 kameshj
>> +     +1 kameshj, arfrever
> 
> Hmmm.  Instead of voting to apply the patch at that address, perhaps we
> should create a branch, apply the patch to the branch, and then vote on
> the branch?  It seems a bit easier for people to review, and a bit more
> inline with our process.  Of course, if we want to change the process,
> that's fine, too. :)

Why should we have short-lived-branch to track one trivial-item specific
for 1.5.x alone and merge later, why not rather directly commit it after
approval.


With regards
Kamesh Jayachandran
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIFedI3WHvyO0YTCwRAvcZAJ4iNXcE4gOVHU/OS+cW6THdYiHWCgCfZG+i
tTjLK5xNZt1XOfKu8WyuU4Y=
=Jkqp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org