On 07/07/2011 04:09 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
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)
+1
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?
OOO340 contains everything which is also in DEV300 m106. Lucky coincidence.
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?
Exactly.
You could also wait until tomorrow and directly download a OOO340.hg
bundle via http://hg.services.openoffice.org/bundle/OOO340.hg
The bundle should be available around 3:00 GMT tonight.
Regards,
Heiner
--
Jens-Heiner Rechtien
