On Sunday 17 October 2010 15:11:34 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> Sorry but I'm not sure which commit is related to the v1.12 OCL, so I leave
> this to someone else to do. S
Gitorious only has trunk in rtt-svn-patches. I don't have any svn branch in a
git repository. I'll cleanup some of the rubbish branches though, and maybe
rename rtt-svn-patches to rtt-svn-trunk, for clarity.
1.x patches should only be made for trunk, and then backported to each branch
needing them. For 2.x, it's the other way around. We start adding it to the
oldest branch that needs it and then merge to 'newer/next' branches and
master.
> On Sunday 17 October 2010 15:11:34 Stephen Roderick wrote:
>> Sorry but I'm not sure which commit is related to the v1.12 OCL, so I leave
>> this to someone else to do. S
>
> Gitorious only has trunk in rtt-svn-patches. I don't have any svn branch in a
> git repository. I'll cleanup some of the rubbish branches though, and maybe
> rename rtt-svn-patches to rtt-svn-trunk, for clarity.
>
> 1.x patches should only be made for trunk, and then backported to each branch
> needing them. For 2.x, it's the other way around. We start adding it to the
> oldest branch that needs it and then merge to 'newer/next' branches and
> master.
>
> Peter
Ahh, confused ... gitorious/orocos-toolchain/ocl shows 3 branches: master, toolchain-2.0, and toolchain-2.1. All appear to be v2 related. This is OCL I'm worried about, not RTT.
I am trying to patch directly to whatever is the current trunk/master for either v1 or v2. I figure if you want it merged to another branch, you'll tell me.
S
On Sunday 17 October 2010 22:29:19 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Oct 17, 2010, at 16:15 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Sunday 17 October 2010 15:11:34 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> >> Sorry but I'm not sure which commit is related to the v1.12 OCL, so I
> >> leave this to someone else to do. S
> >
> > Gitorious only has trunk in rtt-svn-patches. I don't have any svn branch
> > in a git repository. I'll cleanup some of the rubbish branches though,
> > and maybe rename rtt-svn-patches to rtt-svn-trunk, for clarity.
> >
> > 1.x patches should only be made for trunk, and then backported to each
> > branch needing them. For 2.x, it's the other way around. We start adding
> > it to the oldest branch that needs it and then merge to 'newer/next'
> > branches and master.
> >
> > Peter
>
> Ahh, confused ... gitorious/orocos-toolchain/ocl shows 3 branches: master,
> toolchain-2.0, and toolchain-2.1. All appear to be v2 related. This is OCL
> I'm worried about, not RTT.
>
> I am trying to patch directly to whatever is the current trunk/master for
> either v1 or v2. I figure if you want it merged to another branch, you'll
> tell me. S
Oops :-) s/gitorious/github/g
I misread the question. gitorious only contains 2.x branches. As I wrote, 1.x
is officially only on SVN, with mirrors of the trunks on my github space.
> On Sunday 17 October 2010 22:29:19 Stephen Roderick wrote:
>> On Oct 17, 2010, at 16:15 , Peter Soetens wrote:
>>> On Sunday 17 October 2010 15:11:34 Stephen Roderick wrote:
>>>> Sorry but I'm not sure which commit is related to the v1.12 OCL, so I
>>>> leave this to someone else to do. S
>>>
>>> Gitorious only has trunk in rtt-svn-patches. I don't have any svn branch
>>> in a git repository. I'll cleanup some of the rubbish branches though,
>>> and maybe rename rtt-svn-patches to rtt-svn-trunk, for clarity.
>>>
>>> 1.x patches should only be made for trunk, and then backported to each
>>> branch needing them. For 2.x, it's the other way around. We start adding
>>> it to the oldest branch that needs it and then merge to 'newer/next'
>>> branches and master.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>
>> Ahh, confused ... gitorious/orocos-toolchain/ocl shows 3 branches: master,
>> toolchain-2.0, and toolchain-2.1. All appear to be v2 related. This is OCL
>> I'm worried about, not RTT.
>>
>> I am trying to patch directly to whatever is the current trunk/master for
>> either v1 or v2. I figure if you want it merged to another branch, you'll
>> tell me. S
>
> Oops :-) s/gitorious/github/g
>
> I misread the question. gitorious only contains 2.x branches. As I wrote, 1.x
> is officially only on SVN, with mirrors of the trunks on my github space.
Any chance you could mirror to gitorious also? If our primary development is occuring there, would be nice to have everything in one place (so we don't have to go to two websites to do pull requests, etc).
S
Gitorious OCL toolchain missing v1 branch
On Sunday 17 October 2010 15:11:34 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> Sorry but I'm not sure which commit is related to the v1.12 OCL, so I leave
> this to someone else to do. S
Gitorious only has trunk in rtt-svn-patches. I don't have any svn branch in a
git repository. I'll cleanup some of the rubbish branches though, and maybe
rename rtt-svn-patches to rtt-svn-trunk, for clarity.
1.x patches should only be made for trunk, and then backported to each branch
needing them. For 2.x, it's the other way around. We start adding it to the
oldest branch that needs it and then merge to 'newer/next' branches and
master.
Peter
Gitorious OCL toolchain missing v1 branch
On Oct 17, 2010, at 16:15 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> On Sunday 17 October 2010 15:11:34 Stephen Roderick wrote:
>> Sorry but I'm not sure which commit is related to the v1.12 OCL, so I leave
>> this to someone else to do. S
>
> Gitorious only has trunk in rtt-svn-patches. I don't have any svn branch in a
> git repository. I'll cleanup some of the rubbish branches though, and maybe
> rename rtt-svn-patches to rtt-svn-trunk, for clarity.
>
> 1.x patches should only be made for trunk, and then backported to each branch
> needing them. For 2.x, it's the other way around. We start adding it to the
> oldest branch that needs it and then merge to 'newer/next' branches and
> master.
>
> Peter
Ahh, confused ... gitorious/orocos-toolchain/ocl shows 3 branches: master, toolchain-2.0, and toolchain-2.1. All appear to be v2 related. This is OCL I'm worried about, not RTT.
I am trying to patch directly to whatever is the current trunk/master for either v1 or v2. I figure if you want it merged to another branch, you'll tell me.
S
Gitorious OCL toolchain missing v1 branch
On Sunday 17 October 2010 22:29:19 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> On Oct 17, 2010, at 16:15 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> > On Sunday 17 October 2010 15:11:34 Stephen Roderick wrote:
> >> Sorry but I'm not sure which commit is related to the v1.12 OCL, so I
> >> leave this to someone else to do. S
> >
> > Gitorious only has trunk in rtt-svn-patches. I don't have any svn branch
> > in a git repository. I'll cleanup some of the rubbish branches though,
> > and maybe rename rtt-svn-patches to rtt-svn-trunk, for clarity.
> >
> > 1.x patches should only be made for trunk, and then backported to each
> > branch needing them. For 2.x, it's the other way around. We start adding
> > it to the oldest branch that needs it and then merge to 'newer/next'
> > branches and master.
> >
> > Peter
>
> Ahh, confused ... gitorious/orocos-toolchain/ocl shows 3 branches: master,
> toolchain-2.0, and toolchain-2.1. All appear to be v2 related. This is OCL
> I'm worried about, not RTT.
>
> I am trying to patch directly to whatever is the current trunk/master for
> either v1 or v2. I figure if you want it merged to another branch, you'll
> tell me. S
Oops :-) s/gitorious/github/g
I misread the question. gitorious only contains 2.x branches. As I wrote, 1.x
is officially only on SVN, with mirrors of the trunks on my github space.
Peter
Gitorious OCL toolchain missing v1 branch
On Oct 18, 2010, at 03:07 , Peter Soetens wrote:
> On Sunday 17 October 2010 22:29:19 Stephen Roderick wrote:
>> On Oct 17, 2010, at 16:15 , Peter Soetens wrote:
>>> On Sunday 17 October 2010 15:11:34 Stephen Roderick wrote:
>>>> Sorry but I'm not sure which commit is related to the v1.12 OCL, so I
>>>> leave this to someone else to do. S
>>>
>>> Gitorious only has trunk in rtt-svn-patches. I don't have any svn branch
>>> in a git repository. I'll cleanup some of the rubbish branches though,
>>> and maybe rename rtt-svn-patches to rtt-svn-trunk, for clarity.
>>>
>>> 1.x patches should only be made for trunk, and then backported to each
>>> branch needing them. For 2.x, it's the other way around. We start adding
>>> it to the oldest branch that needs it and then merge to 'newer/next'
>>> branches and master.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>
>> Ahh, confused ... gitorious/orocos-toolchain/ocl shows 3 branches: master,
>> toolchain-2.0, and toolchain-2.1. All appear to be v2 related. This is OCL
>> I'm worried about, not RTT.
>>
>> I am trying to patch directly to whatever is the current trunk/master for
>> either v1 or v2. I figure if you want it merged to another branch, you'll
>> tell me. S
>
> Oops :-) s/gitorious/github/g
>
> I misread the question. gitorious only contains 2.x branches. As I wrote, 1.x
> is officially only on SVN, with mirrors of the trunks on my github space.
Any chance you could mirror to gitorious also? If our primary development is occuring there, would be nice to have everything in one place (so we don't have to go to two websites to do pull requests, etc).
S