Hi,
On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 at 12:05 +0100, Lothar Gesslein wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Good idea to move this to developers list...
> 
> > Well, good idea but I think trunk and drifted to far apart to manage this.
> > 
> > As a first shot I would assume we copy the stable to a "new trunk" and
> > merge all the stuff from the current trunk that is not intended for 1.0
> > again.
> > Then trunk and branch are more related again as they are now.
> 
> Hm, i don't really know because i wasn't able to produce a list of
> changesets missing in one of the branches, but my guess is that it's
> even harder to port everything from trunk to a copy of the 1.0 branch,
> because of much more changes went to trunk only (by reason).
> Changes is trunk are more "revolutionary", introducing big subsystems
> like routerboard or kernel 2.6. Changes in the 1.0 branch are
> "evolutionary", fixing bugs or changing smaller subsystems like the
> ifup-down script.

Trunk is not so much behind Branch. There are some minor package
Updates missing (new nfs-server stuff). 

There is one thing completely missing, it is the mk/targets.mk stuff
and autogeneration of the model specific interfaces file.

I am not completely happy with the solution in FreeWRT 1.0, so I
will add something else to trunk, therefore no need to sync.

The method in 1.0 works, but I like to remove some duplicate stuff.
 
> The situation is not as bad as my first mail might suggest, the problem
> is "simply" _finding_ the missing changesets. If somebody is able to
> produce a list of them, merging should not require manual intervention
> too often.

If you have time, please merge the nfs kernel server stuff.
 
bye
 Waldemar
_______________________________________________
freewrt-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.freewrt.org/lists/listinfo/freewrt-developers

Reply via email to