2010/9/9 Nathan Bubna <nbu...@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Antonio Petrelli > <antonio.petre...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2010/9/8 Nathan Bubna <nbu...@gmail.com>: >>> 2) Merge sandboxed Engine project(s) into the 2.x branch of Engine >>> 3) Copy trunks of current projects into maintenance branches (e.g. >>> 2.0.x branch for Tools) >>> 4) Merge other sandboxed projects into their respective project trunks >>> >>> and i only say merge so that changes in the various trunks/branches >>> that happened since you copied things off to the sandbox are not lost. >>> i know there have been some Engine 2.x changes at least. i can't >>> recall if Tools changed in that time. >> >> No, because classes are moved around in various places and in various >> subdirectories that it would be too difficult (impossible?) to merge. > > there aren't that many changes to Engine 2 and Tools 2 since you > forked, and they need to be merged in one way or another. it doesn't > have to be svn merge.
I try to explain it better (note that I mean svn merge, and yes, it has to be it). Merging from the current branch to the sandbox is *easy*, the only difficulty is finding the correct source root, since some classes have been moved from the main projects to submodules. Merging from the sandbox to the branch is *difficult*, because SVN is not so smart at identifying code movements. I mean, the merge (ideally) should port the fact that a piece of code *moved*. So I would like to (svn) merge from the branch to the sandbox and then moving the branch to archive and move the sandboxed project to the place where the branch was. Antonio --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@velocity.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@velocity.apache.org
