On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 11:25:06AM -0700, Bernard Li wrote: > Hi Carlo: Hi Bernard,
sorry to take so long to reply, but seems you somehow sent this email to the ganglia developer list thinking that was my personal email address. if you really intended this email to be sent to all ganglia developers, I really fail to see what interest they might have about this discussion about commit strategies, specially considering it is all clearly explained in our wiki documentation and preferences are personal anyway (after all you directed the email to me only). will reply anyway, so whatever the intention or objective it will be fulfilled, but you might want to clarify that further to make it effective. > http://ganglia.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/ganglia/branches/monitor-core-3.1/configure.in?revision=1674&view=markup > > I think when doing backports, we should not lump other changes into > the same commit. That is sadly not always possible, as some backports will require conflict resolutions and others might need changes that are specific to the backported branch and different of what is in trunk. In any case, the commit message should clearly explain what was committed and all those extra changes should be minor enough not to require their own voting request as explained in our documentation: http://ganglia.wiki.sourceforge.net/ganglia_works > In r1674, it looks like you backported c1640 from > trunk and made 2 other changes. right. I think that was clear by the commit message which shows : r1674 | carenas | 2008-08-13 09:59:23 -0700 (Wed, 13 Aug 2008) | 6 lines build: janitorial fixes to configure, bump revision name/version svn merge -c 1640 trunk Reviewed-by: Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I would recommend that these be done in a separate commit in the future. if you are talking about the "bump revision name/version" part of the commit, then I agree they should had been done long ago, when 3.1.0 was released and 3.1.1 was open for development (maybe together with r1616). indeed in retrospective I should had probably included those at least in r1655 after I realized we somehow forgot to bump the release information, but wasn't expecting it will take that long for you to come up with some similar commit anyway, since you started already the discussion about the next code name to use just a couple of days before. > BTW, what's with this change? > > -GANGLIA_RELEASE_NAME="Amelia" > +GANGLIA_RELEASE_NAME="NoAmelia" just a placeholder so that the snapshots that are generated don't get confused with the pre 3.1.0 release snapshots, as otherwise all of them will have the same name, and very similar version numbers. don't forget that after all the following is true: pre-release 3.1 snapshot: 3.1.0.999 (Amelia) to 3.1.0.1562 (Amelia) official release: 3.1.0 (Amelia) pre 3.1.1 snapshot: 3.1.0.1563 (Amelia) to 3.1.0.1674 (Amelia) this change at least allows any user of recent snapshots to distinguish between 3.1.0 (Amelia) and pre-3.1.1 (NoAmelia) pre-releases and since we are now officially in freeze hope you will be able to come up with a release name to replace this placeholder with and which we will use for the upcoming 3.1.1 release. Carlo ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Ganglia-developers mailing list Ganglia-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ganglia-developers
