Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-ojb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 67683 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2004 23:54:16 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Jul 2004 23:54:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 46980 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jul 2004 23:54:15 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-ojb-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 46926 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jul 2004 23:54:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "OJB Developers List" Reply-To: "OJB Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list ojb-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 46913 invoked by uid 99); 24 Jul 2004 23:54:15 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [209.137.167.162] (HELO filter.fridayfives.net) (209.137.167.162) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Sat, 24 Jul 2004 16:54:13 -0700 Received: by filter.fridayfives.net (Postfix, from userid 5054) id 1007F6FCAD; Sat, 24 Jul 2004 18:44:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from freki (freki [127.0.0.1]) by freki (Postfix) with SMTP id CBF926FCAE for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2004 18:44:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [172.20.1.50] (pcp09699887pcs.limstn01.de.comcast.net [69.240.190.104]) by filter.fridayfives.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E81A6FCAD for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2004 18:44:17 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v618) In-Reply-To: <4102EDE0.7070509@apache.org> References: <4102C221.5060501@gmx.ch> <34BDF770-DDAF-11D8-9B70-000A95782782@forthillcompany.com> <4102E4B0.3010101@apache.org> <4102EDE0.7070509@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Brian McCallister Subject: Re: OJB 1.0.1 Bug Fix Release ? Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 19:54:01 -0400 To: "OJB Developers List" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.618) X-Spam-Bayes-Score: 0.0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on freki X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK, RCVD_IN_SORBS autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Trunk to branch should probably be done by hand. CVS automerge will try to pull everything, unfortunately =/ Good way to find most is probably to just do a diff and compare. Mergin from branch to trunk can usually be done by "cvs merge" as branch changes should generally all be pulled. -Brian On Jul 24, 2004, at 7:16 PM, Armin Waibel wrote: > Brian McCallister wrote: > >> branch -> trunk >> Only bug fixes go in branch, so any change in branch SHOULD be >> applied to trunk as well. >> new development goes in trunk, so most changes probably SHOULD NOT be >> applied to branch. >> > > Thanks Brian! Will do so in future (I will check in some more changes > to trunk today). > How do we get made changes from trunk to branch? Merge each changed > class from trunk to branch by hand? > > > regards, > Armin > > >> -Brian >> On Jul 24, 2004, at 6:37 PM, Armin Waibel wrote: >>> Brian McCallister wrote: >>> >>>> We'll need to port bug fixes into the OJB_1_0_RELEASE branch as >>>> well if we intend to release bug fixes off of that branch. That or >>>> selectively merge changes. >>>> >>> >>> Add my changes to trunk only too - sorry. >>> >>>> I tend to be of the opinion that checking bug fixes into the >>>> current bug fix branch, and merging to head is easier. Merging >>>> from head to bug fix branch is hard to separate out new >>>> development. >>> >>> >>> I know we have merge problems with the first attempt of branching >>> (OJB_1_0_branch) some month ago, but I forget what's the better way >>> to go: >>> merge branch --> trunk >>> merge trunk --> branch >>> >>> regards >>> Armin >>> >>>> -Brian >>>> On Jul 24, 2004, at 4:10 PM, Jakob Braeuchi wrote: >>>> >>>>> hi brian, >>>>> >>>>> i only committed to the head. is this a problem ? >>>>> >>>>> jakob >>>>> >>>>> Brian McCallister schrieb: >>>>> >>>>>> We've had a few small bug fixes that have been requested by users >>>>>> and fixed in CVS. >>>>>> I'm thinking we should push 1.0.1 off the OJB_1_0_RELEASE branch >>>>>> soon so that people who needed these can get them without working >>>>>> against CVS. >>>>>> Have fixes been applied in just HEAD or on the 1_0 branch as well? >>>>>> -Brian >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> -- - >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> -- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> - >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org >>> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org