[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r36553 - tags/0.33.1

From: Daniel Rall <dlr_at_finemaltcoding.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 23:43:21 -0700

Replacing the old copyfrom is mostly pedantic, providing a consistent
copyfrom when building the tag both the youngest and "shipping"
revision. I was also concerned that the svn:mergeinfo would've changed
(even though the content was unaltered), but this didn't happen.

On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> How is one copyfrom better than the other? Do we have a rationale for
> why we would choose one over the other? And, therefore, why we should
> change these tags again?
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 17:19, Daniel Rall <dlr_at_finemaltcoding.com> wrote:
>> I tend to think that all of these commits should be backed out to
>> restore the original copyfrom info.
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer_at_samba.org> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 08:41:45PM +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>>> Hyrum K. Wright wrote on Sat, 14 Mar 2009 at 12:11 -0500:
>>>> > On Mar 14, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
>>>> > > On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 08:17:58 -0700, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
>>>
>>>> > >> Author: jrvernooij
>>>> > >> Date: Sat Mar 14 08:17:58 2009
>>>> > >> New Revision: 36553
>>>
>>>> > >> Log:
>>>> > >> Add tag 0.33.1
>>>> > > I'm sorry about this spur of tag updates. For some reason bzr-svn
>>>> > > thought
>>>> > > I had these tags changed locally. I'll refrain from using it until I'm
>>>> > > sure it won't do things like this again.
>>>
>>>> > Out of curiosity, have you verified that there weren't any changes
>>>> > between the replaced tag and the new one?
>>>
>>>
>>>> FWIW, the only changes I found were in the copyfrom-revisions:
>>>
>>>>     % svn log -qvl1 ^/tags/0.33.1_at_r36552
>>>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>     r7796 | josander | 2003-11-18 20:15:18 +0200 (Tue, 18 Nov 2003)
>>>>     Changed paths:
>>>>        D /branches/release-0.33.1
>>>>        A /tags/0.33.1 (from /branches/release-0.33.1:7795)
>>>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>>     % svn log -qvl1 ^/tags/0.33.1_at_r36553
>>>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>     r36553 | jrvernooij | 2009-03-14 17:17:58 +0200 (Sat, 14 Mar 2009)
>>>>     Changed paths:
>>>>        R /tags/0.33.1 (from /branches/release-0.33.1:7789)
>>>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>> 7795 != 7789.
>>>
>>> Since there aren't any changes on /branches/release-0.33.1 between r7789 and
>>> r7795, this is effectively the same tag. My apologies again for
>>> accidently readding these tags, it won't happen again.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Jelmer
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1334140
>>
>

------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1345929
Received on 2009-03-18 07:43:38 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.