When you do merges (and not rebases) your bisect and blame also conk out.
http://mettadore.com/analysis/a-simple-git-rebase-workflow-explained/
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:39:11AM -0700, Alena Prokharchyk wrote:
> Fixed this particular problem to unblock the QA and dev. It should have
> been if (!canHandleLbRules). The problem was introduced by my merge from
> internalLb branch done with the single squashed commit
> (2660a6b7a7f226ab757d2175222db62571813120) on May 9th. Not sure why
> Nitin's merge from May 11th overrode the master history for
> NetscalerElement.java file. Nitin, how did you make your merge?
>
> Thanks,
> -Alena.
>
> On 5/15/13 6:11 AM, "murali reddy" <muralimmre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Git blame shows un-intended change due
> >to c11dbad9c9ba7a876243ec02e90215906cfd9115. Nitin, can you see why your
> >merge brought these changes? Please figure root cause, its possible other
> >files got affected as well.
> >
> >On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Rajesh Battala
> ><rajesh.batt...@citrix.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I was not able to create LB rule on Netscaler device when Netscaler
> >>device
> >> is my LB provider in my network offering.
> >> I debugged and figured out that, in applyLBRules method
> >>
> >>
> >> if (canHandleLbRules(rules)) {
> >> return false;
> >> }
> >>
> >> Even the method canHandleLbRules is returning true[ means Netscaler
> >> element can handle the LB rule]
> >> its sending the wrong return value causing the failure of creating rule
> >>on
> >> NS device But showing the LB rule creation is success and LB rule is
> >> persisted in db.
> >>
> >> Fix is to add "!" in the if logic, but is there any other reason why
> >>it's
> >> not added. This method is introduced in recent merges.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Rajesh Battala
> >>
> >
>
--
Prasanna.,
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com
