Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>>>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>>>> I'm not convinced Marc got the branching/tagging right; let's wait
>>>>> the dust settles.
>>>> I IM'ed him and he said to go ahead.
>>> Maybe he said that, but I see no evidence that he's tagged 8.0.0
>>> correctly. If you touch the repository you'll make it materially
>>> harder to fix this. So HOLD OFF, please.
>> Too late, sorry. Marc says the 8.0.0 is a tag and a branch.
> Note that REL8_0_STABLE is the tag/branch ... HEAD should be clear to
> commit to ... the error that Tom was eluding to was that I had
> mis-named the original branch as REL8_0_0, instead of REL8_0_STABLE
> ... if someone knows how to safely remove a branch that has had no
> commits made to it, please let me know, but from reading the docs, the
> suggestions that seemed to be suggested had very big *BEWARE* signs
> around them ...
> tags are easy to move around and remove, branches, apparently, aren't
> so simple ...
Quite so. Only by direct hacking on the ,v files, AFAIK - i.e. NOT
something to be done except in dire emergency. As long as nobody commits
to the branch is there any harm done by leaving it there? I presume all
the committers know which branch they should be committing to (and also
that most other than Tom only rarely commit to anything other than HEAD)
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Reinhard Max||Date: 2005-01-18 17:07:29|
|Subject: Re: Is CVS HEAD open for 8.1 commits?|
|Previous:||From: John DeSoi||Date: 2005-01-18 16:38:16|
|Subject: Re: psql 8.0 final not working on NT 4.0sp6|