<!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">
This does not look too bad, but to save ourselves the hassle let's just
stick with plan A. Until further notice please avoid submitting
anything to trunk.<br>
<br>
Shawn, can you plan to create the new FDO SVN repository on Monday by
merging all of the fdoXXX trunks?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Bob <br>
<br>
<br>
Greg Boone wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid4187BAA24A3D094F925AEE0BE39B70770535B45C@msgusaemb01.autodesk.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi all,
At this point, we have identified the following code submissions that
were made in the trunk and not in 3.2.x
603
628
652
Details...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r603 | brentrobinson | 2006-12-18 10:09:39 -0500 (Mon, 18 Dec 2006) | 1
line
Changed paths:
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Common.vcproj
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Fdo.vcproj
A /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Common/Compare.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/ByteValue.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/DataValue.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/DateTimeValue.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/DecimalValue.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/DoubleValue.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/Int16Value.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/Int32Value.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/Int64Value.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/SingleValue.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/StringValue.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Schema/MergeContext.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Schema/PropertyValueConstraint.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Schema/PropertyValueConstraintList.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Schema/PropertyValueConstraintRange.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/FdoCommon.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Makefile.am
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/ByteValue.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/DataValue.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/DateTimeValue.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/DecimalValue.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/DoubleValue.cpp
A /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/ExpressionInternal.cpp
A /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/ExpressionInternal.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/Int16Value.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/Int32Value.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/Int64Value.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/SingleValue.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Expression/StringValue.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Makefile.am
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Schema/DataPropertyDefinition.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Schema/MergeContext.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Schema/PropertyValueConstraintList.cpp
M
/trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Fdo/Schema/PropertyValueConstraintRange.cpp
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Src/Message/FDOMessage.mc
FDO342: Support SDF constraint update.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r628 | brentrobinson | 2007-01-12 17:38:53 -0500 (Fri, 12 Jan 2007) | 1
line
Changed paths:
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Expression/DoubleValue.h
Removed circular friend reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r652 | brentrobinson | 2007-01-23 16:21:24 -0500 (Tue, 23 Jan 2007) | 1
line
Changed paths:
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Fdo.vcproj
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Raster/DataValueCollection.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo/Raster/IRasterPropertyDictionary.h
M /trunk/Fdo/Unmanaged/Inc/Fdo.h
Deprecated redundant Inc/Fdo/Raster/DataValueCollection.h.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Boone
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 10:15 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>