Reviewed some more lists:
fcl-db:
34464,34468,34469,34510,34962,34963,34980,35209,35419,35486,35899
34962,34963 - this was already merget as a special patch IIRC
35209 - IMO depends on changes in sqldb (which are related to code page
awara TStringField, TMemoField)
L.
On 06/18/2017 01:33 AM, Nikolay Nikolov wrote:
On 06/17/2017 10:31 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
While I have not done much the last month, I did keep up with most of
the
merging so most requests have been honoured, and I plan to branch mid
next
week or even monday if there is not much
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
>> >> already merged. Only active ones matter.
>>
>> Reviewed some more lists:
>
> It was last call for emergency revs the day before
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
>> already merged. Only active ones matter.
Reviewed some more lists:
It was last call for emergency revs the day before release branching, not
everything you could find :-)
No problem,
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> >> already merged. Only active ones matter.
>
> Reviewed some more lists:
It was last call for emergency revs the day before release branching, not
everything you could find :-)
Maybe I should have made that clearer. The changes of Nikolay
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> Some quick checks (greps for the searchterm in commitlog+ filenames)
The 'merge sets' are followed by a pair of numbers. What is the
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> Some quick checks (greps for the searchterm in commitlog+ filenames)
The 'merge sets' are followed by a pair of numbers. What is the
In our previous episode, Nikolay Nikolov said:
> > Note that compiler/language merges need approval and an estimate of
> > mergability from a compiler devel.
> >
> ptc merge request:
>
> r34598, r35481, r36507, r36508, r36509, r36555, r36556
Merged. The first is the FSF address update, so I got
On 06/17/2017 10:31 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
While I have not done much the last month, I did keep up with most of the
merging so most requests have been honoured, and I plan to branch mid next
week or even monday if there is not much response.
If I missed some, or there are important
In our previous episode, Joost van der Sluis said:
> >
> > .. which has tie-ins to unmerged TProcess revisions.
>
> Then skip them. As you can see they solve TProcess-related problems on
> Windows. Maybe these problems are not there in fixes.
They are new features, not fixes:
* patch by
In our previous episode, Marco van de Voort said:
> > 32759
> > 33016
> > 33017
> > 33033 *
>
>
> The first four merge, but the fifth has conflicts that are easily resolved
> but won't compile. r32022 ?
.. which has tie-ins to unmerged TProcess revisions.
In our previous episode, Joost van der Sluis said:
[ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ]
> Op 19-06-17 om 22:52 schreef Joost van der Sluis:
> > I'll see if I can make a list with hotfixes. Which will be a pain to
> > merge, as the code in which the fixes are done might even not exist
> >
Op 19-06-17 om 22:52 schreef Joost van der Sluis:
I'll see if I can make a list with hotfixes. Which will be a pain to
merge, as the code in which the fixes are done might even not exist
anymore.
But I think we have to change http into https in a few places...
Ok, please merge:
32732
32759
In our previous episode, Denis Kozlov said:
> Can you merge r35878 as well please?
>
> It is a small fix for TAssert.AssertEquals with strings.
Done.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
In our previous episode, Joost van der Sluis said:
> > merging so most requests have been honoured, and I plan to branch mid next
> > week or even monday if there is not much response.
> >
> > If I missed some, or there are important new ones, there is still a few days
> > time, waiting for the
Can you merge r35878 as well please?
It is a small fix for TAssert.AssertEquals with strings.
Thanks,
Denis
On 17/06/2017 20:31, Marco van de Voort wrote:
While I have not done much the last month, I did keep up with most of the
merging so most requests have been honoured, and I plan to
In our previous episode, Marco van de Voort said:
>
> So all new revs enter the "to be merged not in other sets" category, and
> when I do queries I get lists of revs that go into the query categories.
so e.g. newer fcl-base revs might still be in the to be merged category.
The
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
>
> You may want to add this info as a 'legend' to the pages, because it is not
> readily obvious
> (well, not to me anyway). Maybe also put the inactive ones at the end...
I added a line, but the most important thing to understand is that the
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> > Some quick checks (greps for the searchterm in commitlog+ filenames)
>
> The 'merge sets' are followed by a pair of numbers.
> What is the meaning of these numbers ?
Active/inactive
> Then if I open 'fcl-pdf', I see: (inactive) Revisions
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> time, waiting for the win32/64 findfirst fix.
This is now fixed, rev. 36510.
I will still check the svn log of rtl/packages for any fixes that may be merged.
Unless you have somewhere an
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> > time, waiting for the win32/64 findfirst fix.
>
> This is now fixed, rev. 36510.
>
> I will still check the svn log of rtl/packages for any fixes that may be
> merged.
>
> Unless you have somewhere an up-to-date list of possible candidates
Op 18-06-17 om 09:34 schreef Michael Van Canneyt:
Below a really long list. They are patches that happened after tag of
3.0.2,
so they suppose that all earlier patches to fcl-pdf, fcl-js, pas2js,
fcl-passrc
have been merged already (which, I think, should be the case).
Everything related
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017, Marco van de Voort wrote:
While I have not done much the last month, I did keep up with most of the
merging so most requests have been honoured, and I plan to branch mid next
week or even monday if there is not much response.
If I missed some, or there are important new
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017, Marco van de Voort wrote:
While I have not done much the last month, I did keep up with most of the
merging so most requests have been honoured, and I plan to branch mid next
week or even monday if there is not much response.
If I missed some, or there are important new
On 06/17/2017 10:31 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
While I have not done much the last month, I did keep up with most of the
merging so most requests have been honoured, and I plan to branch mid next
week or even monday if there is not much response.
If I missed some, or there are important
Op 17-06-17 om 21:31 schreef Marco van de Voort:
While I have not done much the last month, I did keep up with most of the
merging so most requests have been honoured, and I plan to branch mid next
week or even monday if there is not much response.
If I missed some, or there are important new
26 matches
Mail list logo
