Re: SourceForge

It should be, or else it will shortly be brought up to date almost
automatically. (why I am a bit diffuse here is because I forgot to look
at the merge status from the last update, so I am not entirely sure
everything went OK without manual intervention)

All the branches on SourceForge are tracking their parent branches (for
most this is "devel") with the scripts mentioned on
http://squid.sourceforge.net/CVS.html. Every night (or morning depending
on where you are) the "devel" branch gets updated to match the HEAD
version of Squid, and then at time from time I run "cvsmerge devel" on
the various branches that are active to bring them up to date.

So in a sense you could say that the patches are incrementally ported to
the current version while they are at SourceForge, getting input from
both your development and the HEAD squid version.

/Henrik

Robert Collins wrote:
>
> so the NTLM is actually ready for merging then (assuming the code is
> stable)?
>
> Rob
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Henrik Nordstrom" <hno@hem.passagen.se>
> To: "Adrian Chadd" <adrian@creative.net.au>
> Cc: <squid-dev@squid-cache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 12:27 AM
> Subject: Re: Patch: splay-tree-based version of the proxy_auth ACL
>
> > Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, yes, commit it to a sourceforge branch so we can track it that way
> > > and do cool merge testing things.
> >
> > Which also has the big benefit that when it is decided that the patch
> > should be merged into HEAD then it is immediately ready for merging
> > without the need to port it to the current Squid version first.
> >
> > /Henrik
> >
> >
Received on Tue Oct 17 2000 - 21:55:26 MDT