[os-infrastructure] SVN 'sync' from piccolo

[Andrew Ross]

Hi Paul,
 
Please don't panic.
 
We've got a piccolo branch now, that is in lock step with piccolo main.
I merged the changes to the main branch and must have clobbered your
changes. We're not going to throw out your changes or anyone else's. 
 
This was the first sync, and thus not terribly surprising a few issues
happened. I'll sort it out later today (as some people wanting to talk
to me just walked into our code sprint room).
 
I'll fix it. :-)
 
Andrew

________________________________

From: opensource-infrastructure-bounces at lists.ingres.com
[mailto:opensource-infrastructure-bounces at lists.ingres.com] On Behalf Of
Paul Mason
Sent: June 16, 2008 12:24 PM
To: Discussions about the infrastructure needed to support a true
opensourcecommunity
Subject: [os-infrastructure] SVN 'sync' from piccolo



I've just updated my opensource build areas to the latest and greatest
svn and found that they no longer build. This seems to be because
changes that had been made to avoid errors on 64-bit linux and on Ubuntu
(tickets 67,71,109 and possibly others) have been rolled back by change
#168, rev 98 "sync latest code from piccolo main".

 

I'm guessing that what happened is that r98 is simply the latest piccolo
head revs and any changes previously made in SVN that hadn't been
crossed into piccolo have now been undone.

 

I actually contributed a couple of the changes to get the build on
Ubuntu working smoothly and whilst they're not that big, they did
represent a fair amount of work tracking down where the problem was. Now
since I work for Ingres I have some idea about what's going on. If I was
an external contributor I might just decide not to bother in future if
my contributions are, as far as I can tell, just thrown away. 

 

I realise that we're in an "experimental" phase right now and that the
issues around co-ordinating changes between svn and piccolo are still
being discussed so can I ask,

 

*	Is the plan to manually identify and re-apply such changes that
have been lost? 

 

*	Is this kind of "back to baseline" sync liable to happen again? 

 

*	If so, ought we perhaps to warn users on the website so that
such roll backs don't come as a nasty surprise? 

 

 

cheers

 

Paul Mason

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ingres.com/pipermail/opensource-infrastructure/attachments/20080616/d8402aa1/attachment.html