On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Aaron Stone <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Dustin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wednesday, April 4, 2012 11:48:26 AM UTC-7, Aaron Stone wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello list! Long time. The storage engine branch looks a little bit
>>> behind master - is 
>>> github.com/memcached/**memcached:engine-pu<http://github.com/memcached/memcached:engine-pu>the
>>>  most up to date branch (last commit in late 2011)?
>>>
>>> I'm thinking about writing a proxying storage backend--rather than using
>>> one of the many memcached proxies, as it keep close to upstream protoco,
>>> bugfixes, etc. This may also be a useful example of how to use the storage
>>> engine interface...
>>>
>>> But going back to the OP, what's the current state of and plan for the
>>> storage engine branch to land as stable?
>>>
>>
>> I've been incrementally working on a merge to catch up with Dormando's
>> master work.  It's a little tedious and I've got more to go.  I'd certainly
>> appreciate some assistance if you're offering.  :)
>>
>> The process I've been going through is to basically use cherry to get the
>> list of changes missing in my branch towards master and then merge each
>> one, one at a time like this:
>>
>>       git merge -Xpatience -Xrename-threshold=100 [next change]
>>
>
> Awesome! Is there a particular point along master to begin merging from,
> or just let cherry tell me?
>
>
>> The engine branch had diverged quite a bit before the new work, so
>> there's a lot of little fixups that are needed.  Sometimes changes need to
>> be basically NOOP merged because they're backports or just things that were
>> unnecessary in the new branch.  Sometimes they're things that used to be
>> globals that are now engine specific.  Several times, they've just merged
>> all by themselves and I've moved on to the next one.  The best ones are the
>> ones that are fixes and have tests.  :)
>>
>
> I'll definitely be able to do a few hours of work on it this week. I'll
> keep you and Wendy posted so that we're not repeating each other's commits.
>

git cherry reported 443 changesets between master and merge-wip. The first
few changesets came back as "Already up-to-date." I ran through the rest
thusly:

for i in $(git cherry master | cut -f2 -d\  ); do
  echo $i;
  git merge -Xpatience -Xrename-threshold=100 $i;
  if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
    echo "STOPPED AT $i";
    break;
  fi;
done

They all came back clear. So... ??? Ship it!

Aaron

Reply via email to