On Sep 7, 2009, at 11:30 AM, Stephen Butler wrote:
> Quoting Neels Janosch Hofmeyr <neels_at_elego.de>:
>
>> Hi stsp, julianf,
>>
>> about the r38000 group --
>>
>> - I've fixed another duplicate notification in
>> r39096,39124,39125
>> - Straightened out some related code, making it "safer", in r39127
>> - I've found a couple other bugs still remaining for replace merges,
>> still unfixed. Test created, last tweaked in r39132.
>>
>> I'd say we include
>> r39096,39124,39125,39127
>> in r38000 if they can be merged easily (stsp?), and sign off the
>> r38000
>> group more or less now. r38000's purpose is, after all, fixing the
>> case
>> where a replace merge with TC straight breaks the merge and WC
>> completely.
>>
>> Agreed?
>
> I agree. I've committed the suggested merge from trunk to the
> 1.6.x-r38000 branch. There was only one minor text conflict.
>
> I've voted for the r38000 group in ^/branches/1.6.x/STATUS. Can I get
> a witness?
For administrative purposes, do we have an issue number here? It'll
be much easier to list the issue number in CHANGES than the whole slew
of revisions currently in that group.
-Hyrum
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2392154
Received on 2009-09-07 23:15:01 CEST