You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by kf...@collab.net on 2004/10/20 12:13:09 UTC
Re: svn commit: r11491 - in branches/1.1.x: . subversion/libsvn_fs_fs
lundblad@tigris.org writes:
> Merge r11364, r11410 from trunk to 1.1.x branch.
>
> Approved by: +1: bliss, kfogel, ghudson
>
> Fix issue 2076 - fsfs does not check if the revision is valid for proplist/
> propedit/etc
>
> Followup to r11364 to fix a problem pointed out by ghudson, namely
> that an empty file is not a valid revprop file. While changing this,
> move the creation of the revprop file back up one call level to where
> the svn:date revprop is set, to make sure that the revprop file for
> revision zero never exists without svn:date set.
We generally don't repeat the original log message in the merge
revision, because that creates data-duplication situation. For
example, if someone were to propedit the original now, the copy would
remain unchanged -- oops, nasty divergence! :-)
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r11491 - in branches/1.1.x: . subversion/libsvn_fs_fs
Posted by "Peter N. Lundblad" <pe...@famlundblad.se>.
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> "Peter N. Lundblad" <pe...@famlundblad.se> writes:
> > Looking back at the logs, I see a lot of commit messages in the merge log
> > message. Did you mean I used too much of the original? A shorter summary
> > would be enough? A summary is good so you don't have to check the
> > revisions to get an idea of what the merge was all about.
>
> Yeah, a short summary is helpful and okay. After all, that's very
> unlikely to change in the original -- whereas the details of the log
> message might well change.
>
You're right and I fixed it.
Thanks,
//Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r11491 - in branches/1.1.x: . subversion/libsvn_fs_fs
Posted by kf...@collab.net.
"Peter N. Lundblad" <pe...@famlundblad.se> writes:
> Looking back at the logs, I see a lot of commit messages in the merge log
> message. Did you mean I used too much of the original? A shorter summary
> would be enough? A summary is good so you don't have to check the
> revisions to get an idea of what the merge was all about.
Yeah, a short summary is helpful and okay. After all, that's very
unlikely to change in the original -- whereas the details of the log
message might well change.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r11491 - in branches/1.1.x: . subversion/libsvn_fs_fs
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@btopenworld.com>.
Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>
>>lundblad@tigris.org writes:
>>
>>>Merge r11364, r11410 from trunk to 1.1.x branch.
>>>
>>>Approved by: +1: bliss, kfogel, ghudson
>>>
>>>Fix issue 2076 - fsfs does not check if the revision is valid for proplist/
>>> propedit/etc
>>>
>>>Followup to r11364 to fix a problem pointed out by ghudson, namely
>>>that an empty file is not a valid revprop file. While changing this,
>>>move the creation of the revprop file back up one call level to where
>>>the svn:date revprop is set, to make sure that the revprop file for
>>>revision zero never exists without svn:date set.
>>
>>We generally don't repeat the original log message in the merge
>>revision, because that creates data-duplication situation. For
>>example, if someone were to propedit the original now, the copy would
>>remain unchanged -- oops, nasty divergence! :-)
>
> Looking back at the logs, I see a lot of commit messages in the merge log
> message.
Do you mean you see a lot of duplication of log message contents in
other people's merge log messages?
> Did you mean I used too much of the original? A shorter summary
> would be enough? A summary is good so you don't have to check the
> revisions to get an idea of what the merge was all about.
Yes, I believe that's about whart Karl means. In the log message above,
delete the last paragraph (which was a summary of r11410 individually),
just leaving the short "Fix issue 2076 - fsfs ..." paragraph which is a
summary of the whole thing.
- Julian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r11491 - in branches/1.1.x: . subversion/libsvn_fs_fs
Posted by "Peter N. Lundblad" <pe...@famlundblad.se>.
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> lundblad@tigris.org writes:
> > Merge r11364, r11410 from trunk to 1.1.x branch.
> >
> > Approved by: +1: bliss, kfogel, ghudson
> >
> > Fix issue 2076 - fsfs does not check if the revision is valid for proplist/
> > propedit/etc
> >
> > Followup to r11364 to fix a problem pointed out by ghudson, namely
> > that an empty file is not a valid revprop file. While changing this,
> > move the creation of the revprop file back up one call level to where
> > the svn:date revprop is set, to make sure that the revprop file for
> > revision zero never exists without svn:date set.
>
> We generally don't repeat the original log message in the merge
> revision, because that creates data-duplication situation. For
> example, if someone were to propedit the original now, the copy would
> remain unchanged -- oops, nasty divergence! :-)
>
Looking back at the logs, I see a lot of commit messages in the merge log
message. Did you mean I used too much of the original? A shorter summary
would be enough? A summary is good so you don't have to check the
revisions to get an idea of what the merge was all about.
//Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org