Hi Karl,
Thanks to the asnwer. I know the functions of SVN and I didn't say that the
people
in latter-day *cannot* chase the history on JIRA, but *will have hard time*
to chase them. But now I see it depends on the size of the contribution, thanks.
But I think patches still have an advantage for searching. ;-)
koji
(13/06/24 9:15), Karl Wright wrote:
Hi Koji-san,
Let me clarify a little...
Try this command:
svn log https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/manifoldcf/branches
You will see log entries for every branch, including branch deletions:
r1489317 | kwright | 2013-06-04 04:11:49 -0400 (Tue, 04 Jun 2013) | 1 line
Remove unused branch.
<<<<<<
To find out what branch was removed by that commit:
svn log -c 1489317 -v https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/manifoldcf/branches
r1489317 | kwright | 2013-06-04 04:11:49 -0400 (Tue, 04 Jun 2013) | 1 line
Changed paths:
D /manifoldcf/branches/CONNECTORS-696
Remove unused branch.
<<<<<<
To find the predelete history of CONNECTORS-696:
svn log --stop-on-copy
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/manifoldcf/branches/CONNECTORS-696@1489316
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r1488526 | minoru | 2013-06-01 09:19:56 -0400 (Sat, 01 Jun 2013) | 1 line
Add file system output connector.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r1488525 | minoru | 2013-06-01 09:16:28 -0400 (Sat, 01 Jun 2013) | 1 line
Add File system output connector
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r1488524 | minoru | 2013-06-01 09:15:25 -0400 (Sat, 01 Jun 2013) | 1 line
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r1488504 | minoru | 2013-06-01 07:37:35 -0400 (Sat, 01 Jun 2013) | 1 line
Creating a branch of CONNECTOR-696
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Karl Wright <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Koji-san,
I think the current process depends on the size of the change. For small
or medium-scale changes, a patch (or even a direct commit) is fine. For
something like an entire connector, however, it makes sense to create a
branch, since such a substantial patch may be a challenge to get right and
to review thoroughly. This is especially true when more than one person is
working collaboratively on the same ticket.
As for this point:
If no patch files are attched in JIRA, people in latter-day will have hard
time
to chase the history of improvement/communication cycle on the ticket.
<<<<<<
SVN does maintain the history of the branch even after it is deleted. So
there is an audit trail, which is pretty obvious as long as people note
that a branch was indeed created.
Karl
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Koji Sekiguchi <[email protected]>wrote:
MCF Committers,
There seems to be an accepted practice in MCF community todays says that
making a branch rather than attaching a patch for a new JIRA.
But I'd like to look into a patch rather than a branch, because if the new
function is acceptted, the diff is going to be merged, then the branch is
removed.
If no patch files are attched in JIRA, people in latter-day will have
hard time
to chase the history of improvement/communication cycle on the ticket.
I'm positive using braches for development, but I'd like to see patches
for some
checkpoints.
Thought?
koji
--
http://soleami.com/blog/automatically-acquiring-synonym-knowledge-from-wikipedia.html
--
http://soleami.com/blog/automatically-acquiring-synonym-knowledge-from-wikipedia.html
