On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Guillaume Lelarge <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 18/06/2010 22:59, Dave Page a écrit : >> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Guillaume Lelarge >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> [...] >>> PS: of course, I won't commit until we branch out 1.12. >> >> I think I've given up on my desire to have a sequential commit >> reference for QA's benefit. We should figure out how we can move to >> GIT withut breaking the back branches which currently still use that. >> > > I don't get it. What are you afraid of breaking? the sequential commit > reference will break for everything, back branches and trunk.
The current code expects to be in an SVN repo, and runs things like 'svn info' at build time. >> Doing so would make this sort of work easier.... > > As a matter of fact, it'll make it easier. But it's already not that > hard. I just keep it in a separate branch, and merging is really easy > with git. Moreover, I don't intend to work on a lot of patches till we > branch. This one was just a warm-up. I'll now work on a better i18n. And > then, exclusion constraint and SQL/Med objects. Which would already be > great to have in mid-august. :-) -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
