curator-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott Blum <dragonsi...@apache.org>
Subject Re: CURATOR-217?
Date Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:10:06 GMT
BTW: I noticed a couple of new commits
(ba4b5d8cb1f9733d3901b0b619528454d3dbf8c8
& 2343daf29388566b0efa0b0a2ad21574fb534a27) where 3.0 is getting merged
into feature branches.  Almost every project I've been on we don't tend to
do that as it leads to confusing history (this isn't just aesthetic, it can
get harder for tooling to figure out what happened).  If I want to pull
changes from the main branch into my feature branch, I would typically
*rebase* my feature branch against the main branch.

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@apache.org> wrote:

> Yeah, 217 & 161 were the first two big things in 3.0.
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>
>> OK - Also, is CURATOR-161 complete? The issue is still open in Jira.
>>
>>
>>
>> On August 24, 2015 at 12:47:21 AM, Cameron McKenzie (
>> mckenzie.cam@gmail.com) wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I merged it in last week some time.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Scott, did CURATOR-217 get merged into the new CURATOR-3.0?
>> >
>> > -Jordan
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message