[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [FRC] Merge branch 'branch-1.11' into maint
From: |
Peter Rosin |
Subject: |
Re: [FRC] Merge branch 'branch-1.11' into maint |
Date: |
Thu, 02 Feb 2012 09:32:41 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 |
Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-02-01 22:56:
> On 02/01/2012 10:33 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-02-01 22:31:
>>> On 02/01/2012 09:31 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>>>> On 02/01/2012 03:59 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>>>> When AM_PROG_CC_C_O is after AC_OUTPUT, the compile script
>>>>> is not used even if needed, causing testsuite fails if
>>>>> libtool is not used.
>>>>>
>>>>> * tests/depcomp8a.test: Uncomment the AM_PROG_CC_C_O macro
>>>>> in its correct location, as indicated...
>>>>> (configure.in): ...with this comment.
>>>>> * tests/depcomp8b.test: Sync with tests/depcomp8a.test.
>>>>>
>>>> ACK.
>>>>
>>> Wait. On a second thought, wait to push until I've complete
>>> the unification between 'maint' and 'branch-1.11', OK?
>>>
>>> Thanks, and sorry for the confusion,
>>
>> Too late. Sorry.
>>
> No problem luckily. I hadn't really started the merge yet (I
> had only written the commit message, which is below in case
> you care to review it ;-) yet, so I'll just update my repo
> before proceeding.
>
> Thanks for the patience,
> Stefano
>
> -*-*-
>
> Merge branch 'branch-1.11' into maint
>
> Keeping the 'branch-1.11' and 'maint' branches separated has become
> quite labour-intensive, and already caused too much confusion due
> to the entailed divergences (w.r.t. code for MSVC support) between
> the branches 'maint', 'master', 'branch-1.11' and 'msvc'.
>
> So we proceed to merge branch-1.11 into maint, and get rid of
> the msvc branch (since that was already routinely merged into
> branch-1.11). This move shouldn't cause any regression in the
> stability of maint, as branch-1.11 was where we cut our maintenance
> releases from -- so it actually was even stabler and better tested
> than maint was.
>
> The only downside of this "unification" between branch-1.11 and
> maint will be an increased likelihood of merge conflicts taking
> place when we merge maint back into master. But this can only
> happen in two scenarios:
>
> - right after an update to the Automake version number in
> 'configure.ac' (which only happens when we cut a release
> from maint, so definitely not often); and
>
> - when we implement a *new* feature in both maint and master, but
> with the version in the two branches having slightly different
> behaviour between the; this has already happened, but only very
s/the;/them;/
> seldom, and it's clear that it can only happen very seldom if a
> sane development process is maintained.
>
>
Another source of conflicts is the NEWS file. How will that fare with
the unification of maint and branch-1.11?
Cheers,
Peter