Le 09/10/2011 14:36, Jiří Techet a écrit : > On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 13:55, Colomban Wendling > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Le 09/10/2011 02:13, Jiří Techet a écrit : >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've completed the conversion to git. It went quite smoothly because I >>> did it already before and fortunately the checksums remained the same >>> so I could reuse the grafts files I already had (to be sure, I checked >>> all the entries one by one). >>> >>> The repository is here: >>> >>> https://github.com/techee/geany >>> >>> Please have a good look at it. It's no problem to change it now but it >>> will be hard once people start using it. For this reason please resist >>> the temptation and don't update your branches on top of the repository >>> yet. It's safer to wait until everyone agrees the repository is >>> alright. >> >> Looks good, great job again! :) >> >> Just a few questions/remarks: >> >> * the unstable branch don't seem to be always removed after merging, yet >> it is re-created (4f20d88, 2f9719e). This seem not correct since >> according to svn, in both commits the branch was actually created. >> >> * why does 3155474 have two parents? It's supposed to be a new branch >> out of 3a4a5b6; the old build-system branch was removed in r3939 >> (previous rev). > > These two are exactly the points 2 and 4 from > > http://lists.uvena.de/geany-devel/2011-September/005232.html
Oops, my bad :o > The problem is that svn2git doesn't delete the branch after merging it > so when the branch is re-crated, it has two parents - the current > trunk and the last commit from the branch before it was merged. This > was the case both for the unstable branch and configurable menu branch > which existed before already. > > I was asking whether to to fix these and the answer was that it's not > so important but you're right it looks strange so I'll go through the > repository and fix the most obvious cases. It's not much work anyway. I agree it's not so important, just looks a bit weird. If you can fix those easily it's cool, but if it's too hard just don't bother, it's not really a problem. >> * 03c3b75 (r3679) is a bit weird too, it has d3cdd27 (r3680) as parent, >> but as the SVN revision suggests, d3cdd27 is newer than it (13:53:04 vs >> 13:45:47). And I don't see from SVN log why this would be wanted. > > This is apparently my error - judging from the date I should have used > d71d352 for "merge trunk changes". I'll fix that. Great, looking forward to it. I think when this is done all is OK, so we could import it in the official repo :) Cheers, Colomban _______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
