Just a reminder, I'll be re-creating the 2.5 branch tonight at 9pm PST.
-Tanya
What does re-creating mean? Why can't the previously-created 2.5 branch
simply be updated?
I ask because svn history will look a little wierd and it makes it harder for
third parties to track revisions and do merges.
-Dave
Just a reminder, I'll be re-creating the 2.5 branch tonight at 9pm PST.
What does re-creating mean? Why can't the previously-created 2.5 branch
simply be updated?
It means deleting the branch and creating a new one.
I ask because svn history will look a little wierd and it makes it harder for
third parties to track revisions and do merges.
I don't really understand why this is an issue. I'm sure svn is capable of extracting the information that you want. I'd rather not do one giant merge to our existing branch which will only create more noise to llvm-commits.
-Tanya
>> Just a reminder, I'll be re-creating the 2.5 branch tonight at 9pm PST.
>
> What does re-creating mean? Why can't the previously-created 2.5 branch
> simply be updated?It means deleting the branch and creating a new one.
That's what I was afraid of.
> I ask because svn history will look a little wierd and it makes it harder
> for third parties to track revisions and do merges.I don't really understand why this is an issue. I'm sure svn is capable of
extracting the information that you want. I'd rather not do one giant
merge to our existing branch which will only create more noise to
llvm-commits.
A delete followed by a re-copy is more noise than a single commit.
It's a problem because we'll essentially have created two branches with the
same name. Yes, I can extract the information "by eye" but we have scripts
here that walk svn history to do merges and a re-created branch is probably
going to confuse them.
-Dave