Bryce L Nordgren a écrit :
It may be easier to delete the branch and recreate it (possibly with
the same name), just for making
easier to track the changes done after the merge.
Ahh, but we're not merging the in-progress ISO stuff to trunk, meaning that
the ISO work would disappear with a delet
Martin Desruisseaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 05/18/2006
01:09:53 AM:
> Bryce L Nordgren a écrit :
> > Just leave the coverage branch in place when you're done merging. :)
>
> It may be easier to delete the branch and recreate it (possibly with
> the same name), just for making
> easier to tr
Bryce L Nordgren a écrit :
Just leave the coverage branch in place when you're done merging. :)
It may be easier to delete the branch and recreate it (possibly with the same name), just for making
easier to track the changes done after the merge.
Martin.
---
Looks good. Before seeing the list, my primary concern was that incomplete
ISO19123 stuff would be copied onto trunk. This page has alleviated those
concerns. :) Good job.
Just leave the coverage branch in place when you're done merging. :)
Bryce
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 05/16/2006 05:20:
Cory Horner wrote:
Howdy,
In yesterday's IRC meeting, it was mentioned that things would
probably work out if the Coverage Branch were allowed to merge onto
trunk, starting now -- providing they are finished in mid-June (4 weeks).
Here is the schedule:
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTO
Howdy,
In yesterday's IRC meeting, it was mentioned that things would probably work
out if the Coverage Branch were allowed to merge onto trunk, starting now --
providing they are finished in mid-June (4 weeks).
Here is the schedule:
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Coverage+Branch+M
