[Kde-scm-interest] kapptemplate rules

[Sebastian Dörner]

Are you sure it's exactly the same result?
There is one commit just at the edge of both parent maps. Iirc, when I
tried it with one parentmap, this commit was duplicated, once connected to
the forward-history, once connected to the backwards-history.

If this does not occur anymore, then there is no reason to have that split.
I guess there might also be better ways to make sure that commit is proper
part of the history, but I don't remember the details anymore. I'll try to
be online this GMT--evening. Have to finish up okteta as well.


On 22 January 2013 03:03, Jeremy Whiting <jpwhiting at kde.org> wrote:

> Sebastian,
> I'm trying to fix up the kapptemplate-rules so the deletion of some files
> from the sources before the rewrite is merged in doesn't bring the files
> back.  I.e. there are some files like summary.ui that shouldn't exist in
> master but do because of the parentmap files.  Anyway, I don't understand
> why there are two parentmap files.  If I run them both sequentially and
> compare the result to running one parentmap with the contents of both files
> I get the same result.  Could you explain why you split the parentmaps into
> two files?
>
> thanks,
> Jeremy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-scm-interest/attachments/20130122/19d47515/attachment.html>