On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Mark Evenson <evenson@...> wrote:
> Ville Voutilainen wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Mark Evenson <evenson@...> wrote:
>>> Revision 11360 has been tagged as [abcl-0.0.11].
>> That raised my eyebrow.. r11360 is the import of the scripting branch.
> I wasn't entirely sure of which revision to tag, so I specified r11360 as
> the version of the repository that certainly contained a good version of
> ABCL 0.0.11, as it was the first revision post Oct 19 (the day that Erik
> announced the release), and r11360 made a copy of 'trunk' which I inferred
> as Erik's implicit sanction as the natural "0.0.11" tag revision.
>> The commit
>> message says r11360 (well, actually it says r113960 which doesn't exist :)
> I made a mistake in the comment for the commit which unfortunately I don't
> think can be edited without a fair amount of pain from what I remember (I
> think one has to dump the repository, replay all the commits up until the
> "bad" comment, etc.)
>> , but
>> the tag itself says it's a copy of trunk version r11356. Most puzzling. :)
> r11356 corresponds to the last change in the repository that was underneath
> the "trunk" which is what I intended by specifying r11360 as the version to
> tag as 'abcl-0.0.11'. This is what I presumed from looking at the svn
> logs/Trac timeline but ensured from using r11360 as the peg revision to
> My logic might be a bit convoluted here, but as far as I know the
> 'abcl-0-0-11' tag faithfully corresponds to what Erik released as
The effect at least is what I intended. Sorry to have been vague about
it. After your mails I went to Trac and found that r11356 is indeed
the magic number.