Thanks Jeff for this very useful explanation. I guess locking is not
needed as long as the system is well understood by everyone (which was not
the case for us, sorry).
Sylvain
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Ralph Castain wrote:
On Jul 22, 2010, at 8:01 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Jul 22, 2010, at 9
On Jul 22, 2010, at 8:01 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On Jul 22, 2010, at 9:54 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:
>
>> We used to have the branches "locked" to all but the gatekeeper to prevent
>> this kind of mistake. Did this change? Or did you forget to lock the 1.5
>> branch?
>
> We changed it for v1.
On Jul 22, 2010, at 9:54 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> We used to have the branches "locked" to all but the gatekeeper to prevent
> this kind of mistake. Did this change? Or did you forget to lock the 1.5
> branch?
We changed it for v1.5 -- they're *not* locked because Ralph (back when Ralph
was
We used to have the branches "locked" to all but the gatekeeper to prevent this
kind of mistake. Did this change? Or did you forget to lock the 1.5 branch?
On Jul 22, 2010, at 6:01 AM, nadia.derbey wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 07:50 -0400, Jeff Squyres wrote:
>> I think I probably wasn't clea
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 07:50 -0400, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> I think I probably wasn't clear to Nadia in my instructions for ticket #2492.
> So I have updated CMR procedures on the wiki:
>
> https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/wiki/SubmittingChangesetMoveReqs
>
> In general:
>
> - Only the gateke
I think I probably wasn't clear to Nadia in my instructions for ticket #2492.
So I have updated CMR procedures on the wiki:
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/wiki/SubmittingChangesetMoveReqs
In general:
- Only the gatekeeper and administrators are supposed to commit to release
branches.
-
