[Kde-pim] PROPOSAL: Moving the KDEPIM Enterprise Branch into the 3.5 Branch

[Till Adam]

On Thursday 11 October 2007 15:39:56 Allen Winter wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 October 2007 7:08:54 pm David Faure wrote:
> > On Thursday 11 October 2007, Allen Winter wrote:
> > > Does it make sense/Is it plausible to effectively eliminate
> > > the enterprise/kdepim branch by moving it into branches/KDE/3.5?
> > 
> > Are we sure that 3.5 has no fixes that didn't go into enterprise?
> > AFAIK my colleagues have set up svnmerge and kept an eye on changes,
> > but still it might be a good idea to make sure we're not overwriting a bugfix.
> > 
> KDAB would have to provide an answer for this.
> I have no idea.

Yes we are reasonably sure of that, but will definitely inspect
the diff before any merge back, to make sure.

> > > So my proposal is:
> > > % svn mv branches/KDE/3.5/kdepim branches/kdepim-crappy
> > > % svn mv branches/kdepim/enterprise/kdepim branches/KDE/3.5/kdepim
> > I think this would break all existing checkouts (including those on all the kde servers like anonsvn and 
mirrors, lxr, websvn, etc.)
> > The (automated) svn update will barf with "cannot replace directory from within" or something like that.
> > The alternative is to merge the diff between the two branches into 3.5, I suppose.
> > This won't provide the history of those changes, but well, I guess the reverse is true as well,
> > replacing 3.5 with enterprise using svn mv means we replace the 3.5 history with the enterprise
> > history (which might not have as much details when it comes to the hacking that happened in the 3.5 branch
> > and was merely merged into enterprise)...
> >
> Hmm... hadn't thought about this.
>  
> > I support the idea of course, I'm just wondering about those small details.
> > Another "small detail" would be: checking with the translators that they are OK with all
> > those new strings appearing in the 3.5 branch - so close to the release.
> > 
> Is there a tool I can run to determine an approximate number of translations
> that would be needed?   A number in the hundreds would be easier to 
> accept than a number in the thousands.

It's not a huge amount, but not trivial either. I would think under a 
hundred, but that's a wild guess.

Cheers,

Till

-- 
Till Adam -- till at kdab.net, adam at kde.org
KDAB, Platform-independent software solutions
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-pim/attachments/20071011/2af3c842/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim at kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/