Re: git: uh-oh

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: git: uh-oh
Дата
Msg-id 21179.1282073388@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: git: uh-oh  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Ответы Re: git: uh-oh  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Re: git: uh-oh  (Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca>)
Re: git: uh-oh  (Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 21:16, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Um ... Magnus has not given any report that he's finished running
>> the conversion. �What exactly are you looking at?

> That's the previous conversion. The one that we used to verify that
> things looked ok. Seems nobody caught this :S

> The new migration looks similarly weird.

> Does anybody with some more git-fu have any clue how this can be?

I lack git-fu pretty completely, but I do have the CVS logs ;-).
It looks like some of these commits that are being ascribed to the
REL8_3_STABLE branch were actually only committed on HEAD.  For
instance my commit in contrib/xml2 on 28 Feb 2010 21:31:57 was
only in HEAD.  It was back-patched a few hours later (1 Mar 3:41),
and that's also shown here, but the HEAD commit shouldn't be.

I wonder whether the repository is completely OK and the problem
is that this webpage isn't filtering the commits correctly.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: git: uh-oh
Следующее
От: Magnus Hagander
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: git: uh-oh