[Nut-upsdev] NUT and Automake
clepple at gmail.com
Sat Nov 4 19:26:31 CET 2006
On 11/4/06, Peter Selinger <selinger at mathstat.dal.ca> wrote:
> Charles Lepple wrote:
> > On 11/3/06, Peter Selinger <selinger at mathstat.dal.ca> wrote:
> > > Arnaud Quette wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As told before, I'm still stuck on the MGE NSM v3 release, so if you
> > > > (Charles or Peter) start the trunk merge on the Testing branch, that
> > > > would help.
> > >
> > > Is there anything on the Testing branch that needs to be preserved, or
> > > can we just copy the current trunk to the Testing branch? That would
> > > be very easy.
> > Either way, it's a lot of scattered changes. Of course, we would have
> > to bump the version numbers back down from 2.1.0 if we copy from the
> > trunk, and then there's the issue of making sure we didn't change too
> > much at once.
> > For reference, I was playing with 'svn diff' commands that look like this:
> > svn diff svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/nut/branches/Testing@542 \
> > svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/nut/trunk@542
> I have merged a bunch of changes from the Testing branch back to the
> trunk. These were mostly changes to documentation such as NEWS and
> UPGRADING, as well as some of Arnaud's Sun fixes.
> I don't see any additional Testing features that are missing from the
> trunk. It should therefore now be possible to copy the trunk to
> Testing. This will overwrite everything in Testing, and can be done
> with a simple command like the one Charles used (only replace "diff"
> by "merge"):
> cd nut-testing
> svn merge svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/nut/branches/Testing \
[from later in Peter's email:]
> (However, one should always leave an SVN commit
> message such as "merging -r500:503 from X to Y").
I agree with the need for rev numbers in the commit message (given
Subversion's current lack of support for automatically supporting
multiple merges between branches). I'm just not sure that the merge
command above is smart enough to do what you're suggesting without the
addition of a few revision numbers on the command line.
FWIW, I usually just use the following syntax for 'svn merge':
$ cd branches/Testing
$ svn merge -r123:456 svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/nut/trunk
The diff between the branches before was mostly to see whether or not
it was going to be a simple range of revisions or not.
> It might be a good idea to tag the Testing branch before this update.
> Shall I go ahead and do this?
Sure. Tags are relatively cheap.
> For the future, I recommend the "best practice" that no changes are
> permanent unless they are made in the trunk. If changes made in other
> branches (e.g. the testing branch), it is the responsiblity of the
> author of the change to make sure it is merged to the trunk.
Agreed. Looking at the Solaris changes, it seems like they were first
committed to the trunk, but the later modifications only made it into
- Charles Lepple
More information about the Nut-upsdev