[ofw] commit 1104

[Ishai Rabinovitz]

Sean,

The WDK commit is a result of a long and hard work of Xalex for over a
month.
This kind of change is tedious and there is no simple way of splitting
it into several commits.
We were aware of the problematic nature of this commit and we discussed
it several times: In WWG meeting in Sonoma, on one of the WWG phone
calls, and in several mails in the WinOF mailing list.
We followed the steps that were agreed on in these discussions.

There is a chance that in the future things can be done better, and we
are trying to learn from this change in order to improve future changes.

Let's all try and focus on the future. (e.g., How will Win Verbs branch
merging will be done), Productive comments will be welcomed.

Ishai

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org 
> [mailto:ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Alex 
> Naslednikov
> Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 6:51 PM
> To: Smith, Stan; Hefty, Sean; ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> Subject: RE: [ofw] commit 1104
> 
> Some notes regards  svn 'trunk' commits from rev 1091 thru 1103.
> Commit 1091 was cumulative commit and it contains merge of 
> 4(!) svn trees, in addition to __ptr64 fix and WDK porting. 
> For technical reasons, it was very difficult to divide it 
> into smaller patches, and from the first glance it seems like 
> some commits were lost.
> Except of DAPL commits [that have already been restored], all 
> other commits are in.
> 
> XaleX
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org
> [mailto:ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Smith, Stan
> Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 2:25 AM
> To: Hefty, Sean; ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> Subject: RE: [ofw] commit 1104
> 
> Sean Hefty wrote:
> > First, why wasn't commit 1104 posted to the mail list?
> > 
> > Second, why does it exist at all?  End all of this __ptr64 hacked 
> > cleanup non-sense.
> > 
> > I propose that we that we roll the entire trunk back to 
> commit 1090, 
> > and I am completely serious about this.
> > 
> > - Sean
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > ofw mailing list
> > ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw
> 
> 
> In doing a WDK commit assessment, it appears the WDK commit 
> was a snapshot of the trunk around svn 1091, WDK mods 
> applied, then instead of merging to the svn trunk HEAD, a 
> full replacement commit was performed with modified files 
> based in svn.1091.
> 
> >From a 1st pass analysis, svn 'trunk' commits from rev 1091 thru 1103
> may have been lost!
> 
> S.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ofw mailing list
> ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw
> _______________________________________________
> ofw mailing list
> ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw
>