When you do merges (and not rebases) your bisect and blame also conk out.
http://mettadore.com/analysis/a-simple-git-rebase-workflow-explained/
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:39:11AM -0700, Alena Prokharchyk wrote:
Fixed this particular problem to unblock the QA and dev. It should have
been if (!canHandleLbRules). The problem was introduced by my merge from
internalLb branch done with the single squashed commit
(2660a6b7a7f226ab757d2175222db62571813120) on May 9th. Not sure why
Nitin's merge from May 11th overrode the master history for
NetscalerElement.java file. Nitin, how did you make your merge?
Thanks,
-Alena.
On 5/15/13 6:11 AM, murali reddy muralimmre...@gmail.com wrote:
Git blame shows un-intended change due
to c11dbad9c9ba7a876243ec02e90215906cfd9115. Nitin, can you see why your
merge brought these changes? Please figure root cause, its possible other
files got affected as well.
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Rajesh Battala
rajesh.batt...@citrix.comwrote:
Hi,
I was not able to create LB rule on Netscaler device when Netscaler
device
is my LB provider in my network offering.
I debugged and figured out that, in applyLBRules method
if (canHandleLbRules(rules)) {
return false;
}
Even the method canHandleLbRules is returning true[ means Netscaler
element can handle the LB rule]
its sending the wrong return value causing the failure of creating rule
on
NS device But showing the LB rule creation is success and LB rule is
persisted in db.
Fix is to add ! in the if logic, but is there any other reason why
it's
not added. This method is introduced in recent merges.
Thanks
Rajesh Battala
--
Prasanna.,
Powered by BigRock.com
