r16612 - gnucash/branches/gda-dev - 1) Merge with trunk up to 16597

Phil Longstaff plongstaff at rogers.com
Fri Dec 21 20:28:58 EST 2007

Andreas Köhler wrote:
> Hi Phil,
> Am Sonntag, den 02.12.2007, 16:29 -0500 schrieb Phil Longstaff:
>> Author: plongstaff
>> Date: 2007-12-02 16:29:35 -0500 (Sun, 02 Dec 2007)
>> Trac: http://svn.gnucash.org/trac/changeset/16612
>> Log:
>> 1) Merge with trunk up to 16597
>> 2) When inserting into a table which doesn't have a guid as the
>> primary
>> key (e.g. slots), where the first key is an auto-increment key, don't
>> provide a value for the key.
>> 3) Work on recurrences and scheduled transactions.  They don't work
>> yet,
>> but the sx struct is saved
> Please do not mix merges with actual work.  This complicates the
> handling of that commit afterwards unnecessarily.  I would even say that
> the merge A itself should only resolve physical conflicts, i.e. remove
> conflict markers correctly.  Then a commit B could fix the branch to at
> least compile before adding anything new (C).  For small changes A+B
> might go in together.  But that is only my opinion.
> As your branch has seen several merges, the missing of .gitignore (see
> r16625) let me check the differences between trunk at r16597 and gda-dev.
> The resulting diffstat can be found in the attachment (svn-property
> changes are not included).
>  267 files changed, 124643 insertions(+), 113859 deletions(-)
> That does not look completely right to me. [1] I do not know which merge
> failed, but I think it will be hard to merge your branch back to trunk
> at some point.  It would be nice if you could take a look into this.  My
> suggestion would be to create a new branch gda-dev2 [2], starting from
> current trunk and reapply your work.  This also gives you the chance do
> some things differently in case you have always wanted to :-D
OK.  If you can create a new branch for me, I will move my work over to it.


More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list