[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...
>>>>> ( ...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
>      '' (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


>      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?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]