You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Philip Martin <ph...@codematters.co.uk> on 2005/05/13 13:30:31 UTC
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
josander@tigris.org writes:
> Author: josander
> Date: Thu May 12 04:00:43 2005
> New Revision: 14707
>
> Added:
> branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x/
> - copied from r14706, /branches/1.2.x/
>
> Log:
> Making a branch for add/repair/remove section in the win installer script.
>
> This is for the combination of the 5.x line of Inno Setup and 1.2.x line
> of subversion.
>
> The purpose is to merge the changes into branches/1.2.x
Why is this development not being done on the trunk?
--
Philip Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by "Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net>.
On Saturday 14 May 2005 21.46, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
..
> If you're going to get annoyed when other developers ask you
> straightforward questions, that's going to be a problem. So, please
> don't do that!
OK, sorry everyone. I ask again for apologies, not only to Phillip but to
all of you.
Jostein
--
http://www.josander.net/en/contact/
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by kf...@collab.net.
"Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net> writes:
> I think I gaved a quite clear answer to that when I answered on "Why is
> this development not being done on the trunk" first time. That was not
> enough, a new posting asked .."Is the directory rename the problem, or
> are you saying these changes are not approriate to the trunk?". And yes,
> I was fed up about it. I'm sorry that you see this as an attitude
> problem.
Jostein, I hate to fan the flames here, but:
The followup questions you got were simple requests for more
information. You, on the other hand, started expressing annoyance
from your very first response. And no, your first response was not a
"quite clear answer" -- it barely contained any technical information
at all!
Philip:
"Why is this development not being done on the trunk?"
Jostein:
"Because my Windows Installer related WC of the trunk is very
diffrent from the trunk and no one answered med yesterday on
#svn-dev when I asked about this subject.
And why do you ask me about this?"
Philip:
"I don't use #svn-dev so I don't know what question you asked
there, and that makes it a bit difficult for me to follow your
reasoning here. Is the directory rename the problem, or are you
saying these changes are not approriate to the trunk?
> And why do you ask me about this?
I was just interested to know why you are not following the
project's usual procedure."
Jostein:
"Do I really have to use my time on this? :-(
[...]"
This won't do. It is unacceptable to punish people for asking
reasonable questions on this list.
In your first response, you already start challenging Philip. Why?
He should not have to justify asking a question about why normal
project procedure isn't being followed. Also, you surely know by now
that Philip never hangs out in IRC, so the fact that you discussed it
in #svn-dev is meaningless to him.
Nevertheless, Philip's second response was perfectly civil. He simply
made his request for information more specific: he asked exactly which
part of the change was inappropriate for trunk.
You responded with an insinuation that the whole conversation was a
waste of time. Where did that come from?
If you're going to get annoyed when other developers ask you
straightforward questions, that's going to be a problem. So, please
don't do that!
Thank you,
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by "Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net>.
On Saturday 14 May 2005 18.59, Greg Hudson wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 19:54 +0200, Jostein Chr. Andersen wrote:
> > Do I really have to use my time on this? :-(
>
> I don't like this attitude at all. The Subversion project's
I think I gaved a quite clear answer to that when I answered on "Why is
this development not being done on the trunk" first time. That was not
enough, a new posting asked .."Is the directory rename the problem, or
are you saying these changes are not approriate to the trunk?". And yes,
I was fed up about it. I'm sorry that you see this as an attitude
problem.
Jostein
--
http://www.josander.net/en/contact/
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by Greg Hudson <gh...@MIT.EDU>.
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 19:54 +0200, Jostein Chr. Andersen wrote:
> Do I really have to use my time on this? :-(
I don't like this attitude at all. The Subversion project's philosophy
has always been that the quality of our code base (and in this case, of
our development process) is more important than the convenience of any
single developer, and having a simple question responded to with this
kind of hostility is not consistent with that philosophy.
I don't mean to imply that creating the branch was wrong; I have no
strong opinion on whether developers should be allowed to create
branches without explanation. But when asked for an explanation of
anything you do on Subversion, please do not respond with complaints
that the questioner is wasting your time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by "Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net>.
Hi Erik,
On Sunday 15 May 2005 20.29, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> Hi Jostein,
>
> > I actually want more freedom when we talk about the installer or
> > maybe packages tree could have it's own repo or tree?
>
> From the thread it's obvious you have frustrations with the current
> scheme. I don't want to make assumptions about what they could be, so:
> could you tell us what problems you experience with the current scheme
> and which extra degrees of freedom you think you would need to
> aleviate the problem?
>
>
> I'm asking not to frustrate you more, but because the frustration you
> show now comes rather unexpected: I thought you were maintaining the
> installer without problems...
I don't know if it's a problem or not. It might be a problem if the trunk
or a tag allways should be in sync with the reality. As mentioned
before, this issue is being smaller and smaller :-) I mentioned that
Branko provided me with pre 1.2.x binaries earlier this year, but forgot
to mention that both you and Ben ("sussman") has been doing a great job,
trying to include the same content in the zipfiles as Branko have done.
However, I have a small example: the libdb42.dll you provided in the rc1
(?) of 1.2 instead of the libdb43.dll. This is not a problem by itself
(at least not for me) and things like that just happends from time to
time, I just changed it accordingly in the Installer and just delivered
the package on the 'net.
The "problem" in this is that the internal setup (scripts etc.) in the
svn-1.2.0-rc1-setup.exe was diffrent than the contents of the
repository's "/tags/1.2.0-rc1/". That tag was made several days before
the delivery of the binaries and svn-1.2.0-rc1-setup.exe.
I have several other examples where I have had to "do what it takes" in
order deliver a working functional installer. This range from unexpected
binary files to bugs introduced by me. I repeat again: this situation is
becoming better and better.
So, the reality is that - some times - the installer code has been
changed minutes before compiling of the setup.
So, it would be nice to let the repository reflect the reality some way.
Maybe a /tags/packages/ which contains for example
svn-1.2.0-rc1-setup.exe and the other packages.
I don't know if I'm frustrated or sad or what it is. I just know that I
feel really very bad about all this mess right now (the branches).
Thanks for caring! :-)
J.
--
http://www.josander.net/en/contact/
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by Erik Huelsmann <e....@gmx.net>.
Hi Jostein,
> I actually want more freedom when we talk about the installer or maybe
> packages tree could have it's own repo or tree?
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by "Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net>.
On Saturday 14 May 2005 13.14, Max Bowsher wrote:
..
> > I don't know enough about the installed to judge whether it is
> > appropriate to change it this close to a release, but I still think
> > the r14716 change should be committed to the trunk first.
>
> Agreed, I think it would be inappropriate to merge the branches until
> the equivalent change is committed to trunk, unless, of course, there
> is an extremely good reason.
> To do otherwise would be to turn the project's usual policy of change
> flow between branches on its head.
>
> Jostein?
I can assure you that I'll do it from trunk from now on and expand my
numbers of WCs.
I have already used this changes for RC3 and RC4 (I felt I had to because
the uninstall option was half broken).
Another issue is that I often have had to change the installer scripts in
order to be able to deliver a workable installer. That situation was
quite bad some one and a half year ago (ie. diffrent runtime files
depending of which compiler that made the binaries). This situation is
much better now, and it's getting even better: Branko gaved me some pre
1.2.0 binaries in february so I could have time to deliver some
realistic code in the trunk in time to the final 1.2.0.
I actually want more freedom when we talk about the installer or maybe
packages tree could have it's own repo or tree?
Jostein
--
http://www.josander.net/en/contact/
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by Max Bowsher <ma...@ukf.net>.
Philip Martin wrote:
> "Max Bowsher" <ma...@ukf.net> writes:
>
>> Jostein Chr. Andersen wrote:
>>> Now, can someone give me that plus, at least for the
>>> innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x, r14716? Please? Anyone? I just want it
>>> ready for 1.2.0. ;-)
>>
>> You can +1 it yourself, and then with dlr's +0, that will be enough.
>
> I don't know enough about the installed to judge whether it is
> appropriate to change it this close to a release, but I still think
> the r14716 change should be committed to the trunk first.
Agreed, I think it would be inappropriate to merge the branches until the
equivalent change is committed to trunk, unless, of course, there is an
extremely good reason.
To do otherwise would be to turn the project's usual policy of change flow
between branches on its head.
Jostein?
Max.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by Philip Martin <ph...@codematters.co.uk>.
"Max Bowsher" <ma...@ukf.net> writes:
> Jostein Chr. Andersen wrote:
>> Now, can someone give me that plus, at least for the
>> innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x, r14716? Please? Anyone? I just want it
>> ready for 1.2.0. ;-)
>
> You can +1 it yourself, and then with dlr's +0, that will be enough.
I don't know enough about the installed to judge whether it is
appropriate to change it this close to a release, but I still think
the r14716 change should be committed to the trunk first.
--
Philip Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by Max Bowsher <ma...@ukf.net>.
Jostein Chr. Andersen wrote:
> Now, can someone give me that plus, at least for the
> innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x, r14716? Please? Anyone? I just want it
> ready for 1.2.0. ;-)
You can +1 it yourself, and then with dlr's +0, that will be enough.
Max.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by kf...@collab.net.
"Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net> writes:
> I didn't feel criticized, just annoyed. This felt like hair in the soup
> or something. I have a quick temper, but usually cools down again. :-)
Well, Philip's questions are a bit more than just hair in the soup.
Trunk is preferable because more poeple watch trunk commits than watch
branch commits (especially when it's not a release branch). Also,
conceptually, trunk is the "master source" for all changes in the
project. By default, changes should enter on trunk and be ported out
to branches, unless there's a specific reason to do it differently.
So whenever someone starts doing work on a branch that seems like it
could be done on trunk instead, people will ask why. As Ben said,
it's nothing personal.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by "Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net>.
On Friday 13 May 2005 20.28, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> On May 13, 2005, at 12:54 PM, Jostein Chr. Andersen wrote:
> > So give me the needed +1s hand have some faith!
>
> Jostein, nobody's criticizing you, or questioning the quality of your
I didn't feel criticized, just annoyed. This felt like hair in the soup
or something. I have a quick temper, but usually cools down again. :-)
> excellent installer packages. The problem is that only a subset of
> developers are in IRC; anything discussions or decisions that happen
> there aren't "official". The mailing list is the main way of keeping
> people informed.
...
> So yes, of course you're welcome to work on a branch, we trust you.
> Just keep us in the loop, tell us what's going on before jumping
> in. :-)
OK, the mailing list first then, sorry.
And Philip, I ask for apologies if I've made you sad or anything else
that's not good, that was not my intention.
Now, can someone give me that plus, at least for the
innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x, r14716? Please? Anyone? I just want it
ready for 1.2.0. ;-)
J.
--
http://www.josander.net/en/contact/
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by Ben Collins-Sussman <su...@collab.net>.
On May 13, 2005, at 12:54 PM, Jostein Chr. Andersen wrote:
>
>
> So give me the needed +1s hand have some faith!
>
Jostein, nobody's criticizing you, or questioning the quality of your
excellent installer packages. The problem is that only a subset of
developers are in IRC; anything discussions or decisions that happen
there aren't "official". The mailing list is the main way of keeping
people informed.
If *any* developer created a branch and started working on it without
explanation, we would question what was going on. It's not specific
to you, nor is it indicative of any lack of faith. It's just
customary in this project for people to say, "hey, I'm going to
create a branch to work on X, sound good?" before actually doing so.
So yes, of course you're welcome to work on a branch, we trust you.
Just keep us in the loop, tell us what's going on before jumping
in. :-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by "Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net>.
On Friday 13 May 2005 17.27, Philip Martin wrote:
...
> > Because my Windows Installer related WC of the trunk is very
> > diffrent from the trunk and no one answered med yesterday on
> > #svn-dev when I asked about this subject.
>
> I don't use #svn-dev so I don't know what question you asked there,
> and that makes it a bit difficult for me to follow your reasoning
> here. Is the directory rename the problem, or are you saying these
> changes are not approriate to the trunk?
Do I really have to use my time on this? :-(
I'm in the middle of it and the trunk version of the installer will not
work if I commit my WC now.
I have no idea when the final 1.2.0 comes out and I'm not planning to
finish that work before 1.2.1. My judgment is that when I'm doing it
this way, then that's the best guarantee for making this for the 1.2.0
without myself messing anything up.
I have several WCs, one for each main branch (it's diffrent versions of
Inno Setup for the 1.1.x line and 1.2.x line). Additionally, I have one
WC for the trunk, one for misc work, one for the Subversion book and
finally one each for the new innosetup-hsuninsfix-Xx-1.X.x branches.
This sound complicated, but it's not; and my work do have quite good
quality, but of course, everything can be done better. So please, let me
do my work without letting me use time to explain stuff like this. You
can be very sure that I wouldn't make this branches without some reason,
this is in fact the first time.
So give me the needed +1s hand have some faith!
Jostein
--
http://www.josander.net/en/contact/
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by Philip Martin <ph...@codematters.co.uk>.
"Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net> writes:
> On Friday 13 May 2005 15.30, Philip Martin wrote:
>> josander@tigris.org writes:
> ..
>> > The purpose is to merge the changes into branches/1.2.x
>>
>> Why is this development not being done on the trunk?
>
> Because my Windows Installer related WC of the trunk is very diffrent
> from the trunk and no one answered med yesterday on #svn-dev when I
> asked about this subject.
I don't use #svn-dev so I don't know what question you asked there,
and that makes it a bit difficult for me to follow your reasoning
here. Is the directory rename the problem, or are you saying these
changes are not approriate to the trunk?
> And why do you ask me about this?
I was just interested to know why you are not following the project's
usual procedure.
--
Philip Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn commit: r14707 - branches/innosetup-hsuninsfix-5x-1.2.x
Posted by "Jostein Chr. Andersen" <jo...@josander.net>.
On Friday 13 May 2005 15.30, Philip Martin wrote:
> josander@tigris.org writes:
..
> > The purpose is to merge the changes into branches/1.2.x
>
> Why is this development not being done on the trunk?
Because my Windows Installer related WC of the trunk is very diffrent
from the trunk and no one answered med yesterday on #svn-dev when I
asked about this subject.
And why do you ask me about this?
J.
--
http://www.josander.net/en/contact/