Re: [Postgres-xc-developers] Commit 52a8aea4290851 (Merge with 9.2.3)

[Pavan D. <pav...@gm...>]

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Michael Paquier
<mic...@gm...>wrote:

> OK guys you just put the XC master out-of-sync with PG master:
>
> http://postgres-xc.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=postgres-xc/postgres-xc;a=commit;h=52a8aea4290851e5d40c3bb4e3237ad8aeceaf68
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <
> ash...@en...> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Ahsan Hadi <ahs...@en...>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Pavan,
>>>
>>> Thanks for raising this. Just to make sure i understand the problem, the
>>> next release of postgres-xc will be 1.1. The 1.1 release will be based on
>>> PG 9.2,
>>>
>>
>> and that we should merge from master branch of PostgreSQL upto the point
>> from where REL_9_2 is cut.
>>
> Correcting you here, you will have to merge master branch up to a commit
> which is the intersection of master and  REL9_3_STABLE, the intersection
> commit determined by:
> git merge-base master REL9_3_STABLE.
>

I am sure you mean REL9_2_STABLE because thats the branch we are interested
in.


> .
>
> Resolving it is possible of course, simply delete the existing master
> branch and recreate it down to the commit before the merge.
>

That's not a clean way and I am not sure how it would impact the users who
are already tracking the current master branch. Somebody need to study and
experiment carefully before doing more damage. One way I have seen by
reading docs is to use "git revert -m 1 <merge commit id>". This indeed
would revert the merge commit, but unfortunately will keep the history
around. Also, this would cause problems when next time we try to merge the
REL9_2_STABLE branch to the corresponding XC stable branch.


> Can you guys do it without breaking the repository more??? Or not?
>
>
Calm down :-) We all make mistakes. But I agree. We have to extremely
careful with what we do the repository given that many people are now
following us.

Thanks,
Pavan