On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 17:11, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
So add me to the list of people who think that if
these are going to be recurring, we should look at moving from cvs
to git as soon as 9.0 is released.
The gating factor is
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
So add me to the list of people who think that if
these are going to be recurring, we should look at moving from
cvs to git as soon as 9.0 is released.
The gating factor is not release schedule; it is the
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
So add me to the list of people who think that if
these are going to be recurring, we should look at moving from cvs
to git as soon as 9.0 is released.
The gating factor is not release schedule; it is the still-unaddressed
tasks that must be
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 15:36, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 09:52, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 21:07, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
I wrote:
Perhaps it is as simple, though, as using the client's time
instead of the CVS server's time -- that's one of the things I've
seen cause problems for this sort of thing using CVS before.
I got a brief
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 21:07, Kevin Grittner
Reality check: does the frequency of lost CVS commits within git
seem consistent with this theory?
Well, supposedly all our servers are synced with NTP. I know the main
cvs server is, and the git server
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I have noticed that CVS operations (at least from the user's
viewpoint) work in local time. So even if the clocks are synced,
a different TZ setting could conceivably lead to issues.
Hmmm... If that were the issue I would think we'd've seen the
problem
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
So the list really isn't very long. I think it's perfectly possible to
clear it off before the release. Because we still only want to change
after the release, or are you saying once those are fixed, we can
change even if we happen to be in beta at
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
So add me to the list of people who think that if
these are going to be recurring, we should look at moving from
cvs to git as soon as 9.0 is released.
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 16:59, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 01:53, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
the Git repository is missing parts of
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 09:52, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 16:59, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 01:53, Kevin Grittner
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 09:52, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 16:59, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 01:53, Kevin Grittner
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 09:52, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 16:59, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:44
Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Actually, such a correction patch would be nice and short. Attached
for reference. Thoughts?
That seems better than rewinding the history all the way back
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Actually, such a correction patch would be nice and short. Attached
for reference. Thoughts?
That seems better than rewinding the history all the way back to August.
+1 ... I'm just an interested observer
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 01:53, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
the Git repository is missing parts of two non-recent commits.
We've seen this happen before.
That seems like kind of a blasé attitude toward something upon which
some people rely.
For
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 01:53, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
the Git repository is missing parts of two non-recent commits.
We've seen this happen before.
That seems
On Tuesday, January 19, 2010, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 01:53, Kevin Grittner
kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
the Git repository is missing parts of
* Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net [100119 10:44]:
When we (at Wisconsin State Courts) were using CVS and had scripts to
automatically merge changes from one branch to another, we saw this
sort of thing unless people were very careful to grab a timestamp in
the past for their ranges
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
the Git repository is missing parts of two non-recent
commits.
We've seen this happen before.
That seems like kind of a blasé attitude toward something upon
which some
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Oh, and what sort of delay do you feel would be long enough to
cover any cvs commit including potential network slowness during it
etc.?
Why should the script make any assumptions about delay at all?
It seems to me that the problem comes from
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Oh, and what sort of delay do you feel would be long enough to
cover any cvs commit including potential network slowness during
it etc.?
Why should the script make any assumptions about delay at all?
It
* Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us [100119 11:47]:
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Oh, and what sort of delay do you feel would be long enough to
cover any cvs commit including potential network slowness during it
etc.?
Why should the script make any assumptions about delay
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote:
I haven't looked at the fromcvs code yet to know how easy or
hard it would be to use this logic within that package
Well, now I have looked. It's about 2,000 lines of pretty dense
Ruby code (not as many comments as one would hope, especially
I wrote:
Perhaps it is as simple, though, as using the client's time
instead of the CVS server's time -- that's one of the things I've
seen cause problems for this sort of thing using CVS before.
I got a brief consult with a Ruby programmer here under the if it's
less than ten minutes you
2010/1/17 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net:
Maybe I'm hallucinating and someone could check this in their
environment, but it appears to me that the Git repository is missing
parts of two non-recent commits. See attached patch.
Not having looked at the repo in detail, but I bet this happened
On sön, 2010-01-17 at 20:50 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
As for fixing it, I guess we can try the
rewind-to-commit-before-this-and-rerun. That'll break people who have
branched after, but last time it seemed that most peoples git clients
would clean that up automatically. Which commits are
2010/1/17 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net:
On sön, 2010-01-17 at 20:50 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
As for fixing it, I guess we can try the
rewind-to-commit-before-this-and-rerun. That'll break people who have
branched after, but last time it seemed that most peoples git clients
would
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
2010/1/17 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net:
Maybe I'm hallucinating and someone could check this in their
environment, but it appears to me that the Git repository is missing
parts of two non-recent commits. See attached patch.
Not having looked
2010/1/17 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
2010/1/17 Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net:
Maybe I'm hallucinating and someone could check this in their
environment, but it appears to me that the Git repository is missing
parts of two non-recent commits.
Magnus Hagander wrote:
the Git repository is missing parts of two non-recent commits.
We've seen this happen before.
That seems like kind of a blasé attitude toward something upon which
some people rely.
When we (at Wisconsin State Courts) were using CVS and had scripts to
automatically
31 matches
Mail list logo
