Re: git: uh-oh

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Max Bowsher <maxb(at)f2s(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Michael Haggerty <mhagger(at)alum(dot)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: git: uh-oh
Date: 2010-08-25 15:43:01
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Max Bowsher <maxb(at)f2s(dot)com> writes:
> On 25/08/10 04:21, Tom Lane wrote:
>> What seemed more likely to be artifacts were these:
>> remotes/origin/unlabeled-1.44.2
>> remotes/origin/unlabeled-1.51.2
>> remotes/origin/unlabeled-1.59.2
>> remotes/origin/unlabeled-1.87.2
>> remotes/origin/unlabeled-1.90.2
>> Any idea where those came from?

> These occur when there are numbered revisions in one or more RCS files,
> which lack a branch tag to identify their name. The most likely cause is
> deleting a branch after having committed to it.

> Indeed, all of these five correspond to a commit with the message:

> Make the world at least somewhat safe for zero-column tables, and
> remove the special case in ALTER DROP COLUMN to prohibit dropping a
> table's last column.

It seems likely to me that this has something to do with the aborted
early branch for 7.4 development:

If you read that thread you'll find an agreement that we'd continue
development on HEAD and then do a mega back-patch into REL7_3_STABLE,
but there is no mega back-patch later in the CVS logs. What actually
happened is explained here:

The first actual commit into REL7_3_STABLE that cvs2cl finds is
a mass delete pursuant to my comment there. I am not sure exactly
what Marc did to "move the REL7_3_STABLE tag up to today", but I'll
bet that the funny state of the 2002-09-28 commit has something to
do with that, as it was the first commit into HEAD after Marc
originally established the REL7_3_STABLE branch.

Max's proposed fix seems to involve recognizing those extra versions
as a legitimate branch, which I think we don't really want. It'd be
better if we deleted them.

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Singer 2010-08-25 15:45:34 Re: HS/SR on AIX
Previous Message A.M. 2010-08-25 15:41:03 Re: initdb fails to allocate shared memory