emacs-unicode-2 branch

emacs-unicode-2 branch

[Miles Bader]

I've re-committed my latest trunk-merge to the emacs-unicode-2 branch in
the restored repository (it was [mostly] missing after the recent problems).

Could those of you who have recent pre-failure checkouts of that branch,
please see if the current repository matches your checkout?

Thanks,

-Miles
-- 
`To alcohol!  The cause of, and solution to,
 all of life's problems' --Homer J. Simpson

Other branches? (was: emacs-unicode-2 branch)

[David Kastrup]

Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> writes:

> I've re-committed my latest trunk-merge to the emacs-unicode-2 branch in
> the restored repository (it was [mostly] missing after the recent problems).
>
> Could those of you who have recent pre-failure checkouts of that branch,
> please see if the current repository matches your checkout?

Can we assume that no other branches were affected apaprt from
emacs-unicode-2 and head?

"Affected" would mean one of two things: lost checkins, and
inconsistent metadata.

After all, we have a number of semi-active branches like emacs-xft (or
something like that), emacs-bidi, emacs-multitty, even
emacs-lexical-something.

At least for the post-catch 22 branches (maybe xft, more certainly
multitty), it would be somewhat nice to know we have not lost them.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Other branches? (was: emacs-unicode-2 branch)

[Miles Bader]

On 3/19/07, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
> Can we assume that no other branches were affected apaprt from
> emacs-unicode-2 and head?
...
> After all, we have a number of semi-active branches like emacs-xft (or
> something like that), emacs-bidi, emacs-multitty, even
> emacs-lexical-something.
>
> At least for the post-catch 22 branches (maybe xft, more certainly
> multitty), it would be somewhat nice to know we have not lost them.

[Is multi-tty in the emacs repository now?  It used to be external...]

I think most of the branches are not very active at all, and there's
usually one person that mostly commits to them, so we can just rely on
that person to check.  The "xft" branch is almost defunct I think, and
as far as I know I'm the only person who's committed to it in ages.
The "lexical" branch is also mine, so I can verify that.

[Of course one more general way would be for someone to use the
rsync'd version of the repository to check out copies of the
semi-active branches, and check that they're equal to what's in the
official repository.  I'm not going to do that though...]

-Miles

-- 
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

Re: emacs-unicode-2 branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <87slc2ikjo.fsf@catnip.gol.com>, Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> writes:

> I've re-committed my latest trunk-merge to the emacs-unicode-2 branch in
> the restored repository (it was [mostly] missing after the recent problems).

> Could those of you who have recent pre-failure checkouts of that branch,
> please see if the current repository matches your checkout?

As my working directory was a little bit old, when I did
"cvs update", many files were updated.  But perhaps that is
because of your last sync, and it seems that there's no
problem.  Thank you.

---
Kenichi Handa
handa@m17n.org