Sigh... CVS out of sync 5 minutes after I upload my patches
It is as if the devil plays with it... 5 minutes after I upload my latest patches, CVS gets updated and the patch does not apply anymore. Well, this time I was prepared for that. Anyone who wants to try tab/frame patch no. 15 can download the CVS source on which it is based from the patch site: http://www.geocities.com/ikbenfrank/dillo-200311191409.tar.gz This is the UNPATCHED CVS code that was used to create the patch. To get a working tabbed/frames/etc browser, download this tarball and the patch, then apply the patch. From now on I will always include the CVS code on which the patch was based to get around these irritating synchronisation problems. Indan, if you want to update your HTTPS patch, may I suggest you use this source code tarball instead of current Dillo CVS? This way we are less dependent on the state of CVS... Cheers//Frank -- WWWWW ________________________ ## o o\ / Frank de Lange \ }# \| / +46-734352015 \ \ `--| _/ <Hacker for Hire> \ `---' \ +31-640037120 / \ frank@unternet.org / `------------------------' [ "Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est." ]
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:41:25 +0100 Frank de Lange <frank@unternet.org> wrote:
Anyone who wants to try tab/frame patch no. 15 can download the CVS source on which it is based from the patch site:
http://www.geocities.com/ikbenfrank/dillo-200311191409.tar.gz
cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@dillo.org:/sfhome/cvs/dillo co -D 'Nov 19 14:09 2003' dillo why not use CVS's features? </offtopic>, before we get a new development model discussion
Cheers//Frank
Thorben
It is as if the devil plays with it... 5 minutes after I upload my latest patches, CVS gets updated and the patch does not apply anymore.
Oh so funny. :) I saw you updated your patch today, and the first thing I thought was: Why didn't Frank say that he used the CVS version of yesterday, because CVS didn't change for two days, and _if_ CVS would be updated today, there will be problems. So, the easy sollution is to rename your patch to "dillo-20031120-tabs.patch.gz" and everything will work just fine. Although not with the current CVS of course, but that will happen anyway if you wait long enough. Are the recent changes worth it to update your patch, that's the question. Apparently you already did that, but there is no reason to include the whole source. What Thorben said is exactly what my installer script does; the -D option is nice. Offtopic: Could you reply to the CVS offer from Trent Jarvi and say what you think about a CVS branch? See: http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/pipermail/dillo-dev/2003-November/001470.html I think a seperate CVS branch would be useful, one hosted by the same server as the official Dillo CVS, or an external one, like Trent's. Where doesn't matter much I guess. At least the patches are centralized then.
Indan Zupancic wrote:
It is as if the devil plays with it... 5 minutes after I upload my latest patches, CVS gets updated and the patch does not apply anymore.
Oh so funny. :)
I saw you updated your patch today, and the first thing I thought was: Why didn't Frank say that he used the CVS version of yesterday, because CVS didn't change for two days, and _if_ CVS would be updated today, there will be problems.
That is what the website is for. The name on the patch is the date it is released, the CVS date is the last date CVS is changed. The patch is always based on CVS for the release date (right before I release a patch I update CVS and reconcile any differences, if the differences are big I delay the patch to test the changes), but CVS is not always updated on that day (as you noticed). FYI, the CVS date/time I give is the date/time stamp for the src/ directory. Using CVS features is nice, but have you noticed how many (or few...) people even know how to get source from CVS in the first place? I want the patch to get exposure to as many people as possible, and including the source on which it is based is one way of doing that. Another way would be to release a patched source tree, but I prefer the patch + clean approach.
Could you reply to the CVS offer from Trent Jarvi and say what you think about a CVS branch? See:
http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/pipermail/dillo-dev/2003-November/001470.html
I noticed that posting, have been busy lately hence did not post reply. As there are only two active patch developers at this moment I think we do not need a CVS branch. It should be possible to synchronise releases for two patches. Of course, having a branch on the main Dillo CVS or elsewhere would not hurt, and I do not oppose it. I just think we can do without it for the moment. Cheers//Frank -- WWWWW ________________________ ## o o\ / Frank de Lange \ }# \| / +46-734352015 \ \ `--| _/ <Hacker for Hire> \ `---' \ +31-640037120 / \ frank@unternet.org / `------------------------' [ "Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est." ]
From now on I will always include the CVS code on which the patch was based to get around these irritating synchronisation problems.
Indan, if you want to update your HTTPS patch, may I suggest you use this source code tarball instead of current Dillo CVS? This way we are less dependent on the state of CVS...
I use the -D option in my install script, and I rewrote the thing so I could just give the date at the top and it will download and install the correct CVS and patches, but now that won't work... To make matters worse, I also updated my https code to the current CVS (which didn't change for two days..). I would appreciate it a lot if you make a patch against the current state of CVS and give the file the usual name. I use FILE1="dillo-${YEAR}${MONTH}${DAY}-tabs.patch.gz" in my script, so it's very easy to update when there's a new version. I could add hours and minutes, but I'd rather leave those out, and when you make a updated version, I also don't have to "downdate" my code/patch. Another possibility is that you make a link named dillo-$DATE-tabs.patch.gz where DATE is the date of the Dillo CVS version that works with your patch, and points to the dillo-$RELEASE_DATE-tabs.patch.gz file. You don't have to host the Dillo source you used, not for me anyway, I won't use it, all I need to know is the date of the CVS you used, and sometimes the time too ;-). I think the install script causes more exposure, because it makes it very easy to get a patched Dillo; people don't even have to know what CVS is. The new https patch will be out soon, maybe even today, so you may expect a new installer soon. Greetings, Indan
participants (3)
-
Frank de Lange -
Indan Zupancic -
Thorben Thuermer