From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32272 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2013 17:03:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact archer-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Received: (qmail 32095 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Feb 2013 17:03:23 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 17:03:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Tom Tromey Cc: Project Archer Subject: Re: Proposal to change branch maintenance Message-ID: <20130218170302.GA20180@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <874nhipla5.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130213121556.GA21353@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87k3q5d2mp.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130218161949.GB18304@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87wqu5bn6s.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87wqu5bn6s.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2013-q1/txt/msg00012.txt.bz2 On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 17:29:15 +0100, Tom Tromey wrote: > Jan> I already did so, where do you see them? > Jan> archer.git "master" deletion (+branches cleanup) > Jan> Message-ID: <20111226231836.GA32067@host2.jankratochvil.net> > Jan> http://sourceware.org/ml/archer/2011-q4/msg00010.html > Jan> http://sourceware.org/ml/archer/2012-q1/msg00001.html > > E.g., but there are really many more: > > barimba. git branch -r |grep origin/gdb > origin/gdb-4_18-branch You must have some stale local copy. Both http://sourceware.org/git/?p=archer.git;a=heads and fresh git clone git://sourceware.org/git/archer.git do not show anything other then archer-* branches. BTW gdb.git tags were left there, that could be fixed (but I do not use tags). > It would be possible to do other kinds of automatic merging. > For example we could "cat" the two files together. Yes, that would be great. > Since you're doing most of the serious merges, how about you say which > you'd prefer? In fact it does not matter much as the additional work twice a year is very minor. But I find the 'cat' merge would be best for everyone, even for other people occasionally possibly doing some archer branch merges. Jan