[Nut-upsdev] referring to earlier SVN commits

[Arnaud Quette]

2012/11/20 Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com>

> On Nov 19, 2012, at 2:47 PM, Arnaud Quette wrote:
>
>
>
> 2012/11/19 Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com>
>
>> On Nov 19, 2012, at 5:39 AM, Arnaud Quette wrote:
>>
>> Hi Charles,
>>
>> 2012/11/15 Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com>
>>
>>> On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:37 PM, Arnaud Quette wrote:
>>>
>>> > Fix Buildbot failures on commit r3776
>>>
>>> One small request in the commit messages: please mention exact commit
>>> numbers only if the commit is hard to find. Something like "fix buildbot
>>> failures from previous commit" is specific enough, without making the
>>> reader look up a specific commit number.
>>>
>>
>> ^ this is more for future reference than anything
>>
>>
point taken

> right, sorry about that. I've made myself the exact same comment, but had
>> no time until now to fix the msg.
>> The summary line is now "Fix Buildbot failure on missing manual page",
>> the rest is unchanged.
>>
>>
>> Wait, where did you fix it?
>>
>
> hem, sorry :-/
> I've fixed it directly on the server, as usual, using "svnadmin setlog".
> but I can revert it easily if you prefer.
>
> ESR and I are trying to debug reposurgeon, and we typically use his
>> 'svnpull' script to synchronize the local mirror of the SVN repository.
>> svnpull uses svnsync, which I don't believe will detect direct
>> modifications to the SVN repository.
>>
>> If you want to change a commit message, let us know and we'll add the
>> change to the nut.box script here:
>> https://gitorious.org/reposurgeon/nut-conversion/trees/master
>>
>
> so, do you prefer that I rollback the msg, and you address it through
> nut.box?
>
>
> I went ahead and did a full svnsync just in case, so I should have your
> updates. It's not that we *need* to do the changes through nut.box, but
> that changing the repository directly can introduce discrepancies that are
> hard to track down if we don't know about them. (Theoretically, two people
> converting the NUT repository with reposurgeon should get exactly the same
> Git commit IDs - assuming that the starting SVN repository is identical.)
>

understood, sorry again for the bad reflex! I'll have to fix some bad
habits I took with svn, but already started to.


> Whether you want to change it on the SVN side, or the reposurgeon side,
> just let me know so I know to look out for that change.
>

svn r3777 header was fixed at the same time I sent my mail.
so you and Eric should have a summary line without "r3776" reference.

as told before, if you prefer that I revert this specific msg, just to be
sure, and address it through nut.box, just tell me back

cheers,
Arnaud
-- 
NUT (Network UPS Tools) Project Leader - http://www.networkupstools.org
Debian Developer - http://www.debian.org
Free Software Developer - http://arnaud.quette.fr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsdev/attachments/20121120/04bffbe5/attachment.html>