I've added some info below. John and I will talk more tomorrow and we'll
provide more details soon.
- Original Message -
> From: "Steve Ebersole"
> To: "Strong Liu"
> Cc: "Hibernate hibernate-dev"
> Sent: Tuesday, June 5, 2012 5:07:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [hibernate-dev] new metamode deve
On Jun 5, 2012, at 5:51 PM, John Verhaeg wrote:
>
> On Jun 5, 2012, at 10:27 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>
>> Out of curiosity, why 2 merges?
>
> I was just thinking it might help reduce the number of potential conflicts
> during the first merge. If not, then one is fine in my mind.
Same here
On Jun 5, 2012, at 10:27 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> Out of curiosity, why 2 merges?
I was just thinking it might help reduce the number of potential conflicts
during the first merge. If not, then one is fine in my mind.
___
hibernate-dev mailing l
If we merge (not rebase) then we should be fine to do it without
everyone having to push first. So lets set a time for this to happen.
I really want to hold off branching for JPA 2.1 implementation work
until this happens, so the sooner the better. Tomorrow (6/5)?
Out of curiosity, why 2 mer
+1 for early merges and Hardy's suggestion to merge first w/o combining test &
matrix, then again after combining.
On Jun 5, 2012, at 9:11 AM, Hardy Ferentschik wrote:
>
> On Jun 5, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>
>> Would we merge the directories on each branch and then merge branch
On Jun 5, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> Would we merge the directories on each branch and then merge branches? From
> what little I know of git I think this would be best.
What's about doing first a merge keeping test and matrix and then combining
test+matrix on master and do anot
Would we merge the directories on each branch and then merge branches?
>From what little I know of git I think this would be best.
On Jun 5, 2012 8:30 AM, "Hardy Ferentschik" wrote:
>
> On Jun 5, 2012, at 2:32 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
>
> > I want to start discussing a plan to integrate the mast
On Jun 5, 2012, at 2:32 PM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> I want to start discussing a plan to integrate the master and metamodel
> branches together.
>
> One point of discussion is whether we want to pull master over on to
> metamodel on a regular basis or whether we want to just wait until the
>
I want to start discussing a plan to integrate the master and metamodel
branches together.
One point of discussion is whether we want to pull master over on to
metamodel on a regular basis or whether we want to just wait until the
"very end" and do a single painful integration. I did some sear
Gail and John can speak better to the overall status of this; I have
been working on other things the past month+.
On Tue 05 Jun 2012 02:52:58 AM CDT, Strong Liu wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> As we discussed in the last dev meeting, our main dev resources are moving to
> the new metamodel branch, since
Hi there,
As we discussed in the last dev meeting, our main dev resources are moving to
the new metamodel branch, since I just find time to start working on it,
and not sure about the current status of where we are now, and how much left to
finish it.
So, I'm starting this mail and wondering ma
11 matches
Mail list logo
