Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] Integrating instead of adding

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Andrew "ruskie" Levstik <ruskie AT mages.ath.cx>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Integrating instead of adding
  • Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 17:25:17 +0200

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 07:53:47 -0700
Jason Flatt <jason AT flattfamily.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday 27 April 2004 7:34 am, Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I have recently noticed that some maintainers add files to both devel
> > and test grimoires instead of adding them in test and integrating into
>
> I'm pretty sure that the second "test" should be "devel".
>
> > test (or in rare cases adding into test and integrating into devel).
> > This is manifested by Perforce saying "add/add" instead of "add/branch"
> > on devel/test grimoires. Can we please avoid that? Here's the typical
> > command to be used in these cases (executed from the directory having
> > both devel and test grimoires):
> >
> > p4 integrate -d devel/grimoire/collab/... test/grimoire/collab/...
> > && p4 resolve -as
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Sergey.
>
> --
> Jason Flatt (jason @ flattfamily . com)
> Father of five (http://www.flattfamily.com/)
> Linux user (http://www.sourcemage.org/)
> IRC Nick: Oadae Channels: #sourcemage, #lvlug Server: irc.freenode.net
>
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.12
> GCS/IT d(-) s+:- a>++++ C++$(+++) UL++++ P(+) L+++ E- W++ N+@ o? K? w-- O?
> M-- V PS- PE+ Y+ PGP@ t 5+ X R tv--() b+@ DI+@ D+++ G e h---- r+++ y++++
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss

Isn't it add to devel and integ to test?

Also I notice that certain ppl have their reply-to field set when posting to
the mailing lists
and that is really annoying since a reply will send to that. Would it be to
much to ask to have
an empty reply-to field. Especialy if the filed is equal to the email you use

ruskie

- --
For all the knowledge...
I will prevail...
If I fail nothing is left...
All is lost...
Never to be seen again...
Nevermore...

- --

Key ID = 32FE2034
Key fingerprint = EF36 041B E2A5 4E6F 7B3E 6B45 C0F2 E234 32FE 2034

- --

- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GAT d? s+:+++ a? C++++>$ UL+++ P L+++ E---- W+ N+ o? K? !w O+ !M
V PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t+++ 5+++ !X R++ tv++ b+++ DI? !D G e h! !r !y+
- ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAjntdwPLiNDL+IDQRAot0AJ4hlIf8aiY32XKOPBL7U++OCb7fwACdHmZh
xC2HR2Udu1Ta14G6apbYLr0=
=hT10
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page