On 12/05/2013 01:37 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
Consider this scenario:

- Nathaniel submits RADIUS patches that update the API version (from 2.69 to 2.70)
- I have ACI patches that also bump the version (from 2.69 to 2.70)
- Nathaniel's patches gets accepted
- I rebase my ACI patches onto master. Git thinks that the 2.69->2.70 change is already done, so it leaves VERSION unchanged.

I can solve this locally by telling Git to not merge VERSION automatically, but I think it would be helpful to add a unique comment to each change so that everyone gets a conflict cases like this.
Do you agree?



_______________________________________________
Freeipa-devel mailing list
Freeipa-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel

Makes sense to me.

I'd just add a comment so that the purpose of the last change comment is also obvious for the new developer perusing the VERSION file.

Maybe something along the lines of:

 ########################################################
 IPA_API_VERSION_MAJOR=2
 IPA_API_VERSION_MINOR=70
+# Update the last change entry to enforce conflict on merging two independent branches into master.
+# Last change: npmccallum - RADIUS support

--
Tomas Babej
Associate Software Engeneer | Red Hat | Identity Management
RHCE | Brno Site | IRC: tbabej | freeipa.org

_______________________________________________
Freeipa-devel mailing list
Freeipa-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel

Reply via email to