Re: svn commit: r558718 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/manual/mod: mod_cgi.html.en mod_cgi.xml

On 23/07/07, Joshua Slive <joshuaslive.ca> wrote:
> Optimally you should include both the "Backport
r..." and the original
> log message, but I don't think anyone will object to
having just one
> or the other. Check out the script at
> people.apache.org:~slive/svn.merge
> which I believe sets that up by default. (I didn't
write that script;
> Someone on devhttpd did but I can't recall who.)

Thanks.

> Merge tracking overall is a weak point of subversion at
the moment,
> but is being actively worked on for future versions.
>
> I'm not really sure why you say that checking out at a
higher level
> would help anything. The way subversion works, each
directory is
> potentially independent. So it should matter whether
you have
> ~/httpd/branches/2.2.x/ or just ~/httpd-2.2.x/.

It doesn't make the merge any easier (that often works fine
with two
separate WCs like "svn merge -r99:100 ../httpd-trunk
.") but it would
allow for a single commit rather than two or three (hence
making it
more likely that 2.0 would get fixes).

-- 
noodl

------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribehttpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-helphttpd.apache.org

* Vincent Bray wrote: 

> On 23/07/07, Joshua Slive <joshuaslive.ca> wrote:
> > Optimally you should include both the
"Backport r..." and the original
> > log message, but I don't think anyone will object
to having just one
> > or the other. Check out the script at
> > people.apache.org:~slive/svn.merge
> > which I believe sets that up by default. (I didn't
write that script;
> > Someone on devhttpd did but I can't
recall who.)
>
> Thanks.
>
> > Merge tracking overall is a weak point of
subversion at the moment,
> > but is being actively worked on for future
versions.
> >
> > I'm not really sure why you say that checking out
at a higher level
> > would help anything. The way subversion works,
each directory is
> > potentially independent. So it should matter
whether you have
> > ~/httpd/branches/2.2.x/ or just ~/httpd-2.2.x/.
>
> It doesn't make the merge any easier (that often works
fine with two
> separate WCs like "svn merge -r99:100
../httpd-trunk .") but it would
> allow for a single commit rather than two or three
(hence making it
> more likely that 2.0 would get fixes).

FWIW, I personally like it to see 3 commits, for easier
oversight 
and "think-before-you-type" reasons.
However, I do prefer separate xml and html commits, too 

nd

------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribehttpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-helphttpd.apache.org