This might help: http://git-scm.com/2010/03/08/rerere.html
On 1/11/13 1:16 PM, "Alex Huang" <alex.hu...@citrix.com> wrote: >The problem with these reverts is that I've already pulled them into >javelin when we started the merge. I'm not sure what to do now because >they are quite large and complicated to unwind. > >Any suggestions? > >--Alex > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] >> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 12:10 PM >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [ACS41] Concerns about where development has happened >> >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:40 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: >> > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Chip Childers >> > <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: >> >> IMO, no. I want the first issue resolved first (revert the code that >> >> shouldn't be in the repo). Then we can talk about accepting the >> >> donation proposal I assume is coming. >> >> >> >> But this is just my opinion. Anyone else? >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi >> >> <animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote: >> >>> Chip >> >>> >> >>> Should we expedite IP clearance process and avoid having to revert >> commits? >> >>> >> >>> Thanks >> >>> Animesh >> >>> >> > >> > >> > I don't know that there is a 'expedite' option. Our history thus far >> > is that this doesn't happen rapidly. I think the fastest we can get >> > away with is likely a week - and that's assuming all of the planets >> > align, all paperwork is immediately signed, acknowledged, we have only >> > tailwinds, etc. Given that it is currently the 11th, I'm not even sure >> > that with the volume of problematic features that they'll even be >> > through IP Clearance by code freeze. >> > >> > --David >> > >> >> These reverts are now blocking Chiradeep's refactoring effort / merge >> proposal. I'd suggest that not only should the reverts happen first, >> but that they happen soon please.
