[Box Backup-dev] 07-win32-fixes

Chris Wilson boxbackup-dev at fluffy.co.uk
Mon Dec 12 19:42:49 GMT 2005


Hi all,

On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Martin Ebourne wrote:

> I'm still not sure why I'm project merger, and I'm not all that keen to 
> keep the position! I've ended up being the release manager at work as 
> well, and I don't want that position either!

I'm happy to volunteer for this role if you don't want it, but I 
appreciate your help in reviewing the changes and your advice in general.

> In BackupClientFileAttributes::ReadAttributes there is a new section of 
> code which says "this is to catch those problems with invalid time 
> stamps stored". Is this a windows only problem, or could this happen 
> also on Unix? Should the check be cross platform?

Better ask Nick about that. I don't know why it would be necessary, but if 
it is, I agree that it should be cross-platform.

> I would like to try to remove most of the WIN32 uses by having proper feature 
> tests in configure.ac rather than using the platform define.

Seems like a good idea to me. Please go ahead, or I can try my hand if you 
prefer.

> Later on we can try and do the same for the conditional code sections. 
> In a couple of cases I think we can make them more generic and remove 
> conditionality.

I agree in general, but which cases?

> I'm happy to merge as is and fix this up later, but will need Chris's help 
> for this.

Of course, I'm happy to help with whatever you ask.

> I'm planning to merge with the following command:
>
>   svn merge -r111:187 chris/win32/merge/08-file-renames trunk

Sorry, 08-file-renames is obsolete - I never used it, and it's out of date 
compared to 07-win32-fixes.

> I'd also like to request that in future we don't proliferate so many 
> branches. I checked out a working copy of the whole repository and it takes 
> 2.5GB of disk!

But copying is free (on the server) and making a copy is supposed to be a 
standard (only?) way of creating a tag or branch with SVN, as far as I 
know. I don't think you're supposed to check out the whole repository :-).

> We want to make big changes on a branch, and occasionally it is useful 
> to create a new branch, but I don't think it helps to create a new 
> branch for each cumulative change to a tree. In SVN each checkin is 
> referred to by a single number so unlike CVS it is always easy to cherry 
> pick complete changes out of the history. With a suitable log comment 
> each point in time is just as accessible on a single branch line as it 
> is by branching at each stage.

But searching through log comments is much harder than looking through a 
directory tree. Nevertheless, if people don't want me to create so many 
tags, I will refrain.

> It would probably help to remove some of the branches after the dust has 
> settled. They wouldn't be lost of course, just no longer in the latest 
> version.

Sure, that's fine with me, they will be obsolete anyway after the merge.

Cheers, Chris.
-- 
_ ___ __     _
  / __/ / ,__(_)_  | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK |
/ (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Perl/SQL/HTML Developer |
\ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU-free your mind-and your software |




More information about the Boxbackup-dev mailing list