Integrating msrp history
1 view
Skip to first unread message
agateau
Dec 14, 2010, 6:05:49 PM12/14/10
to msrp
Hi,
Now that msrp history has been imported on github, do you plan to
apply our patches on top of it and replace master with the result?
Aurélien
Now that msrp history has been imported on github, do you plan to
apply our patches on top of it and replace master with the result?
Aurélien
malex
Dec 15, 2010, 6:16:19 AM12/15/10
to msrp
Hi,
yeah, i was just confused by his last 2 commits as i wrote at
https://github.com/malex984/msrp/issues/#issue/8
but i guess if we take the general Rudi's code (without libgen.h/
basename) at the end as you suggested we should be fine just by
rebasing onto Rudi's code.
since (at the moment) most of the commits (in master) are mine i
should probably be better at resolving conflict during master rebase.
next you can rebase cmake branch onto that new master.
does this sound ok for you?
Oleksandr
yeah, i was just confused by his last 2 commits as i wrote at
https://github.com/malex984/msrp/issues/#issue/8
but i guess if we take the general Rudi's code (without libgen.h/
basename) at the end as you suggested we should be fine just by
rebasing onto Rudi's code.
since (at the moment) most of the commits (in master) are mine i
should probably be better at resolving conflict during master rebase.
next you can rebase cmake branch onto that new master.
does this sound ok for you?
Oleksandr
Aurélien Gâteau
Dec 15, 2010, 5:56:46 PM12/15/10
to msrp...@googlegroups.com
On 15/12/2010 12:16, malex wrote:
> Hi,
>
> yeah, i was just confused by his last 2 commits as i wrote at
> https://github.com/malex984/msrp/issues/#issue/8
>
> but i guess if we take the general Rudi's code (without libgen.h/
> basename) at the end as you suggested we should be fine just by
> rebasing onto Rudi's code.
>
> since (at the moment) most of the commits (in master) are mine i
> should probably be better at resolving conflict during master rebase.
>
> next you can rebase cmake branch onto that new master.
>
> does this sound ok for you?
> Hi,
>
> yeah, i was just confused by his last 2 commits as i wrote at
> https://github.com/malex984/msrp/issues/#issue/8
>
> but i guess if we take the general Rudi's code (without libgen.h/
> basename) at the end as you suggested we should be fine just by
> rebasing onto Rudi's code.
>
> since (at the moment) most of the commits (in master) are mine i
> should probably be better at resolving conflict during master rebase.
>
> next you can rebase cmake branch onto that new master.
>
> does this sound ok for you?
Yes, sounds like a good plan.
Aur�lien
malex
Dec 16, 2010, 10:50:00 AM12/16/10
to msrp
Hi,
On Dec 15, 11:56 pm, Aurélien Gâteau <aurelien.gat...@free.fr> wrote:
> On 15/12/2010 12:16, malex wrote:
> > yeah, i was just confused by his last 2 commits as i wrote at
> >https://github.com/malex984/msrp/issues/#issue/8
>
> > but i guess if we take the general Rudi's code (without libgen.h/
> > basename) at the end as you suggested we should be fine just by
> > rebasing onto Rudi's code.
>
> > since (at the moment) most of the commits (in master) are mine i
> > should probably be better at resolving conflict during master rebase.
> > next you can rebase cmake branch onto that new master.
ok, please check out the new [msrp-from-rudi]
ps: i also started the copyright changes (man page is still intact)
Q: do you intent on keeping [cmake] aside of master?
IMHO, as soon as we update NEWs and READMEs (and decide about [cmake])
we will be ready for 0.9.5!
Yours,
malex
On Dec 15, 11:56 pm, Aurélien Gâteau <aurelien.gat...@free.fr> wrote:
> On 15/12/2010 12:16, malex wrote:
> > yeah, i was just confused by his last 2 commits as i wrote at
> >https://github.com/malex984/msrp/issues/#issue/8
>
> > but i guess if we take the general Rudi's code (without libgen.h/
> > basename) at the end as you suggested we should be fine just by
> > rebasing onto Rudi's code.
>
> > since (at the moment) most of the commits (in master) are mine i
> > should probably be better at resolving conflict during master rebase.
> > next you can rebase cmake branch onto that new master.
ps: i also started the copyright changes (man page is still intact)
Q: do you intent on keeping [cmake] aside of master?
IMHO, as soon as we update NEWs and READMEs (and decide about [cmake])
we will be ready for 0.9.5!
Yours,
malex
Aurélien Gâteau
Dec 16, 2010, 6:09:30 PM12/16/10
to msrp...@googlegroups.com
On 16/12/2010 16:50, malex wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Hi,
>
> On Dec 15, 11:56 pm, Aur�lien G�teau <aurelien.gat...@free.fr> wrote:
>> On 15/12/2010 12:16, malex wrote:
>>> yeah, i was just confused by his last 2 commits as i wrote at
>>> https://github.com/malex984/msrp/issues/#issue/8
>>
>>> but i guess if we take the general Rudi's code (without libgen.h/
>>> basename) at the end as you suggested we should be fine just by
>>> rebasing onto Rudi's code.
>>
>>> since (at the moment) most of the commits (in master) are mine i
>>> should probably be better at resolving conflict during master rebase.
>>> next you can rebase cmake branch onto that new master.
>
> ok, please check out the new [msrp-from-rudi]
>
> ps: i also started the copyright changes (man page is still intact)
>> On 15/12/2010 12:16, malex wrote:
>>> yeah, i was just confused by his last 2 commits as i wrote at
>>> https://github.com/malex984/msrp/issues/#issue/8
>>
>>> but i guess if we take the general Rudi's code (without libgen.h/
>>> basename) at the end as you suggested we should be fine just by
>>> rebasing onto Rudi's code.
>>
>>> since (at the moment) most of the commits (in master) are mine i
>>> should probably be better at resolving conflict during master rebase.
>>> next you can rebase cmake branch onto that new master.
>
> ok, please check out the new [msrp-from-rudi]
>
> ps: i also started the copyright changes (man page is still intact)
Sounds good.
> Q: do you intent on keeping [cmake] aside of master?
No, I just wanted to wait for the history to be correctly imported
before merging it. When msrp-from-rudi becomes the new master I'll merge
the msrp-from-rudi-cmake branch in it.
> IMHO, as soon as we update NEWs and READMEs (and decide about [cmake])
> we will be ready for 0.9.5!
Yes, I think so.
Aur�lien
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages