<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Robert,<br>
<br>
Yes that is the line of thinking. 3.2.x stays with the split repository
structure without a defect tracking system. Trunk is merged into a new
repository. My biggest concern is one of confusion and the fact that
Mateusz will need a repository for PostGIS because it will be a 3.2.x
provider.<br>
<br>
Would it be practical to roll all of the changes out of trunk
effectively returning it to the state of 3.2.x. Import that into the
new SVN repository, then immediately branch 3.2.x, and finally
re-commit the post 3.2.x changes. Am I just making work for no reason?<br>
<br>
Bob<br>
<br>
Robert Fortin wrote:
<blockquote
cite="midA4F4647B12DBAD40B07041547CA2526407EF3188@msgusaebk01.autodesk.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Bob,
If I understand well, it is statu quo for 3.2.x branch with no tracking
system. For trunk and future development, it will be done in a new
repository structure. Is that right?
RF
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org">fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org">mailto:fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</a>] On Behalf Of Greg Boone
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 10:16 AM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Cc: Shawn Barnes
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] SVN Repository Merge Issues
In response to your question, "At this point in time, how different is
trunk and 3.2.x", the branch and trunk are mostly identical but not
totally identical. Our decision with branching 3.2.x was that all
changes submitted into the 3.2.x branch should also be submitted into
the trunk. I will have to verify that this is the case. I will look into
this and get back to you.
I know of a couple of submissions that went into the trunk that did not
go into the 3.2.x branch. There were several by Brent R. that come
immediately to mind (See attached) One significant difference is that
Brent dropped a change in the trunk of FDO that changed binary
compatibility between the branch and trunk.
Greg
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org">fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org">mailto:fdo-internals-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</a>] On Behalf Of Robert Bray
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 1:06 AM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Cc: Shawn Barnes
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] SVN Repository Merge Issues
Hmm,
No responses. So everyone is ok with this, everyone is dumbfounded and
shocked into silence, or?
Any better ideas for how to deal with this merge? We need to make a
decision and move forward.
At this point in time, how different is trunk and 3.2.x?
Bob
Robert Bray wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">All,
Shawn has been tinkering with this and has been able to successfully
merge trunk. However it looks like we will not be able to merge the
branches. You can see a preview of the merged repository here:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://test.osgeo.net/trac/fdo-merged/browser/">http://test.osgeo.net/trac/fdo-merged/browser/</a>.
Merging in SVN alters the revision numbers, which is why the branch
merges do not work. Here is the summary from Shawn: "I've searched and
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">spoken with a few people on subversion merges and consensus is,
branches and tags are broken on projects that are being merged into
another project, due to the fact that the tag/branch repository
specific and don't translate to a new repository structure."
So it looks like we may need to have an OLD COLLECTION OF REPOSITORIES
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">(3.2.x) and a NEW REPOSITORY (3.3.x and beyond). This is not ideal but
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I do not know what else to do at this point.
Thoughts and ideas welcome?
Bob
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org">fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org">fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals</a>
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org">fdo-internals@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>