forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gav...." <brightoncomput...@brightontown.com.au>
Subject RE: level of detail for docs (Was: svn commit: r437136)
Date Tue, 29 Aug 2006 08:58:46 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Crossley [mailto:crossley@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 August 2006 9:09 AM
> To: Forrest Developers List
> Subject: level of detail for docs (Was: svn commit: r437136)
> 
> Why do we need this level of detail? 

I was following the level of detail in other examples on the page and
elsewhere on the site.

Surely the "SVN Book"
> explains it better than we can.
> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.0/ch04s04.html#svn-ch-4-sect-4.2

Yes that link was referred to in the emails linked to from the Forrest
Issue. In the same email thread Ross mentioned he asked how it should
Be done and apparently no one knew.
It also states that Antonio stated that the svnbook docs were unclear
In this regard. (Hence my attempt to forrest-ify it and make it clearer
To forrest devs)


> 
> If not, then wouldn't it be better to submit a patch to that project.

I have the time to dedicate to Forrest but none for redbean I'm afraid.

> 
> Sorry if i appear to be jumping on your changes. I am trying
> to use your early contributions to provide guidance.

No problem, thanks, hope my comments here don't make for excuses, 
Just trying to justify my commit :) (And partly why I'm picking
Easy ones first as Im sure you noticed)

> 
> My concerns are that the Forrest Project should not need
> to maintain such documentation and rather concentrate on
> Forrest topics. Our time gets wasted. 

I agree, but the Issue asked for it.

For example, i detect
> some obscurities in what you wrote.

Well, I tried to Forrest-ify it to be relevant, what is unclear ?

> 
> Also the "tips for developers" document is becoming bloated.

Ok, the Issue mentioned this as a (perhaps) place to add it to.

> 
> Also ASF Committers should know how to do this stuff
> or at least know to refer to the SVN Book.

They should, I am confused now though, why was the Issue to add
This stuff created in the first place?

> 
> -David

So now whats the plan, do you want me to truncate the info somewhat to
Maybe one short example?

Thanks

Gav...

> 
> > Author: gmcdonald
> > Date: Sat Aug 26 02:44:52 2006
> > New Revision: 437136
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=437136&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Added in revert SVN changes section as per Jira Issue FOR-875
> >
> > Modified:
> >     forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/howto-dev.xml
> >
> > Modified: forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/howto-dev.xml
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/forrest/trunk/site-
> author/content/xdocs/howto-
> dev.xml?rev=437136&r1=437135&r2=437136&view=diff
> >
> ==========================================================================
> ====
> > --- forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/howto-dev.xml (original)
> > +++ forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/howto-dev.xml Sat Aug 26
> 02:44:52 2006
> > @@ -224,6 +224,63 @@
> >  svn update -r HEAD.
> >          </source>
> >        </section>
> > +        <section id="svn-merge">
> > +          <title>Reverting Changes using SVN Merge</title>
> > +          <p>You may want to revert some changes made to HEAD or may
> want to revert changes made
> > +             to an earlier revision that still exists in HEAD
> today.</p>
> > +          <p>This is where SVN Merge comes in handy. Taking the first
> scenario, here is an
> > +                  example of reverting a change from HEAD to an earlier
> revision 300.</p>
> > +          <source>
> > +# reverting unneccesary changes to %FORREST_HOME%/site-
> author/content/xdocs/index.xml
> > +
> > +$ svn merge -r HEAD:300 /site-author/content/xdocs/index.xml /site-
> author/content/xdocs/index.xml
> > +
> > +# you should then get confirmation of this as :
> > +U       /site-author/content/xdocs/index.xml
> > +
> > +# Then do an svn diff to verify the change is removed.
> > +$ svn diff
> > +...
> > +
> > +# Then commit the reverted changed file(s)
> > +
> > +$ svn commit -m "Undoing changes commited to index.xml in r300."
> > +Sending         /site-author/content/xdocs/index.xml
> > +Transmitting file data .
> > +Committed revision 350.
> > +          </source>
> > +          <p>It should only be neccessary to specify a particular file
> to revert
> > +                  with svn merge only if there are other changed files
> in that revision.</p>
> > +          <p> This second example assumes that way back in revision
> r303 only one change was
> > +                  made to one file and that this is what we want to
> remove.</p>
> > +          <source>
> > +# reverting unneccessary change to /site-author/content/xdocs/index.xml
> > +# - this is the only changed file for this revision.
> > +
> > +svn merge -r 303:302
> > +
> > +# you should then get confirmation of this as "
> > +U       index.xml
> > +
> > +# Then do an svn diff to verify the change is removed.
> > +$ svn diff
> > +...
> > +
> > +# Then commit the reverted changed file(s)
> > +
> > +$ svn commit -m "Undoing unwanted change to index.xml from r303."
> > +Sending         index.xml
> > +Transmitting file data .
> > +Committed revision 351.
> > +          </source>
> > +          <p>The second example above will revert any changes made by
> revision 303
> > +                  from revision 302 and then applies it to the current
> revision HEAD which in
> > +                  this example has become r351. Also note that the
> changes have NOT been removed
> > +                  from ANY revisions in between r303 and r350, so
> rolling back to any of these
> > +                  revisions will add the un-needed change back in
> again.</p>
> > +          <p> More information can be found at <a
> href="http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.0/ch04s04.html#svn-ch-4-sect-
> 4.2">Common use-cases for
> > +                          merging</a> section of the Red Bean SVN
> Book.</p>
> > +      </section>
> >
> >        <section id="svn-patch">
> >          <title>Creating patches</title>
> >
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.6/429 - Release Date: 8/28/2006




Mime
View raw message