Bert Huijben wrote on Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 21:17:16 +0100:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Philip Martin [mailto:philip.martin_at_wandisco.com]
> > Sent: zaterdag 28 februari 2015 19:13
> > To: Bert Huijben
> > Cc: Philip Martin; Branko Čibej; Daniel Shahaf; Subversion Development
> > Subject: Re: 1.8.x backport conflicts bot is red
> >
> > Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl> writes:
> >
> > > I would have expected that the backport script would *only* look at
> > > the branch, as that is what would have to be merged once accepted.
> >
> > I suppose I could do the trivial merge from trunk and generate a
> > mergeinfo change on the branch. That would probably satisfy the
> > backport script.
>
> I don't think the backport script is really that advanced.
> As far as I can tell it just tries the backport and notes problems.
>
> In this case it should have tried the reintegrate from branch.
>
If an entry mentions a branch then the 'svn merge' command run by the
nightly bot will use the branch (and ignore the revisions specified).
However, both the mergebot (nightly) and the conflicts bot (hourly) now
check that the branch contains all revisions named on the "*" line.
Makes sense?
>
> Daniel tweaked the script this week for some other merge problems (related to 1.9). Perhaps this is related.
No, it's related to r1661252 which was committed on Feb 21, not to
r1662760 which was committed yesterday.
Daniel
Received on 2015-02-28 22:46:58 CET