On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 05:20, Mathias Bauer <[email protected]> wrote: >... >> (guess the fact that yours is smaller is caused by me having used DEV300 >> and you OOO340, so some CWSes that are empty for you have content for me) > > Indeed I got more empty cws because I checked against OOO340. As this is > the version we want to use, I updated cws-list.txt accordingly.
I wanted to highlight this particular fact. Is there consensus that we will build the single Hg repository based on OOO340? (with separate bookmarks for all CWSs, pulled against that tag) Previously, I had thought the consensus was DEV300_m106. I believe the choice here implies what "trunk" will end up as: DEV300 or OOO340. I thought that I'd heard there was work completed on DEV300 that is *not* part of OOO340. If that is true, then what should we do that work? I have no opinion, but the fetch-all-cws.sh script is written/documented to work from a DEV300 repository. That will need to be updated. Also, to clarify: OOO340 is the hg.services.openoffice.org/OOO340 repository? And that I can get OOO340 by using the DEV300.hg bundle, then pulling from that repository? Thanks, -g
