Re: Getting rid of the msvc branch

2012-03-09 Thread Peter Rosin
Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-09 08:32: > Hi Peter, sorry for the delay. No trouble at all. > On 03/08/2012 09:24 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-07 22:20: *snip* >> >> Any other branches that might merge maint? Maybe merge yacc-work into >> yl-work-for-master and y

Re: Getting rid of the msvc branch

2012-03-08 Thread Stefano Lattarini
Hi Peter, sorry for the delay. On 03/08/2012 09:24 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-07 22:20: >> >> Let's hope we're out of this merging swamp now :-) > > Indeed, but that reminds me, did we forget any other branches that should > have gotten the same treatment? E.g. yacc

Re: Getting rid of the msvc branch

2012-03-08 Thread Peter Rosin
Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-07 22:20: > On 03/07/2012 09:16 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-07 20:55: >>> On 03/07/2012 08:32 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >>> currently needs to be made on the non-obvious msvc branch instead of on the more natural maint branch. >>>

Re: Getting rid of the msvc branch

2012-03-07 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 03/07/2012 09:16 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-07 20:55: >> On 03/07/2012 08:32 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> >>> currently needs to be made on the non-obvious msvc branch instead >>> of on the more natural maint branch. >>> >> "instead of on" sounds a little forced to me

Re: Getting rid of the msvc branch

2012-03-07 Thread Peter Rosin
Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-07 20:55: > On 03/07/2012 08:32 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-07 16:39: *snip* >>> Could you try to write such a commit message, and post if for review before >>> pushing? Otherwise, I'll try to do so myself -- but I strongly believe that

Re: Getting rid of the msvc branch

2012-03-07 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 03/07/2012 08:32 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-07 16:39: >> On 03/07/2012 04:00 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >>> Peter Rosin skrev 2012-03-07 14:08: Do you think it would be at all possible to start with a msvc and maint that is freshly merged into both master and

Re: Getting rid of the msvc branch

2012-03-07 Thread Peter Rosin
Peter Rosin skrev 2012-03-07 20:32: *snip* > All in all, this merge is not going to affect neither the master s/ not// > branch nor branch-1.11, since it is followed up with dummy merges > masking all changes. The merge is made to maintain the sanity of the > poor developers, who wishes to once ag

Re: Getting rid of the msvc branch

2012-03-07 Thread Peter Rosin
Stefano Lattarini skrev 2012-03-07 16:39: > On 03/07/2012 04:00 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Peter Rosin skrev 2012-03-07 14:08: >>> Do you think it would be at all possible to start with a msvc and maint >>> that is freshly merged into both master and branch-1.11. Then merge msvc >>> into maint in s

Re: Getting rid of the msvc branch

2012-03-07 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 03/07/2012 04:00 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > Peter Rosin skrev 2012-03-07 14:08: >> Do you think it would be at all possible to start with a msvc and maint >> that is freshly merged into both master and branch-1.11. Then merge msvc >> into maint in such a way that maint resembles branch-1.11, then

Getting rid of the msvc branch (was: Re: Removing 'scriptversion' from our scripts)

2012-03-07 Thread Peter Rosin
Peter Rosin skrev 2012-03-07 14:08: > Do you think it would be at all possible to start with a msvc and maint > that is freshly merged into both master and branch-1.11. Then merge msvc > into maint in such a way that maint resembles branch-1.11, then do dummy > merges of maint into master and bran