If the fix is *crucial* on the trunk then it can be fixed in both
places.  You just need to be very careful in what you are doing. 
Basically you need to change only on the branch and then immediately
merge down all changes since the last merge back to the trunk.

There is a trick to SVN merging.  You want to specify specific
revision numbers only when merging.  Basically the start of the merge
range is t+1 and the end is the latest revision number of the myfaces
source.  t is either the revision where you created the branch or the
revision of the last merge.  You can find the latest revision number
by going here: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/ (its the same
for every file in myfaces.)

Its important that you list the merge information in your SVN
comments.  I suggest the following format which I have been using:

latest core branch merge (r382006 - r383651)

This way you can search for "merge" in your gmail archive and find the
last merge point easily.  If you try to merge the same stuff more then
once you get conflicts.  That's why its easier to merge as few times
as possible.

So if there is something important and it can't wait feel free to
follow this procedure.  I don't see any problems with this.  If
someone could add this to our standard practice wiki that would be
helpful (I'm heading to the airport in 2 hours.)

Sean




On 3/9/06, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Sean!
> > NOTE:  Crucial fixes should go on the *branches* only.  I will merge
> > them down to the trunk later.  The worst thing you can do is fix them
> > on both.
> >
> And here we are again ;-)
>
> As you might have read we still have serious problems with the structure
> of shared and have to refactor things out of it - (share refactoring II)
> Applying it only on the branch means the trunk is unusable for the next
> two weeks - at least - AND you might have plenty of work.
>
> Beside this, did we have a branch on tomahawk? else - given we fix only
> on shared-branch - we even cant compile the trunk any further as we have
> to adapt tomahawk to the new classes.
>
>
> So I'll start whining again, please retag after you are back.
> Hopefully work has been done then.
>
> Ciao,
> Mario
>
>

Reply via email to