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

[Michael P. <mic...@gm...>]

On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Pavan Deolasee <pav...@gm...>wrote:

>
>
>
> 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.
>
Oh OK I missed the point. What is aimed here is the stable branch for 1.1.
In this case yes, it is REL9_2_STABLE.
I thought about merging XC-master with future PG-9.3 stable.


>
>
>> .
>>
>> 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.
>
I still vote for cleaning up history and rebasing the master branch. I
recall that you did it once in the past when master was synced with PG-8.4
stable.
-- 
Michael