<html>
Any particular reason for not making a branch and then merging it into trunk when everything is done? (except from having to merge with potential new code
between branch and merge)<BR>
g-)<BR>
<BR>
------- Original message -------<BR>
From: Jan Janak <jan@iptel.org><BR>
Cc: serusers@iptel.org<BR>
Sent: 2.4.'07, 21:33<BR>
<BR>
> Sorry about that, but I announced that the trunk won't compile until I<BR>
> finish my changes. This takes lots of changes in all the modules that<BR>
> talk to the database so I did not want to flush it all at once. On there<BR>
> other hand we have the ottendorf branch in cvs which is pretty much<BR>
> up-to-date with the branch so I thought that it was a good time now to<BR>
> break trunk again.<BR>
> <BR>
> Jan.<BR>
> <BR>
> samuel wrote:<BR>
> > Is there any policy about commiting changes that do not compile?<BR>
> > <BR>
> > Samuel.<BR>
> > <BR>
> > 2007/4/2, Michal Matyska <michal@iptel.org>:<BR>
> >> Hi,<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@cvs.berlios.de:/cvsroot/ser checkout -D<BR>
> >> 20070328 sip_router<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> works for me (the -D option must appear after the checkout command, not<BR>
> >> before) or use the stable branch.<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> Michal<BR>
> >><BR>
> >><BR>
> >> On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 10:50 +0300, İlker Aktuna (Koç.net) wrote:<BR>
> >> > Thank you,<BR>
> >> ><BR>
> >> > Trying right now...<BR>
> >> ><BR>
> >> ><BR>
> >> > -----Original Message-----<BR>
> >> > From: Jan Janak [mailto:jan@iptel.org]<BR>
> >> > Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 10:08 AM<BR>
> >> > To: İlker Aktuna (Koç.net)<BR>
> >> > Cc: Michal Matyska; serusers@iptel.org<BR>
> >> > Subject: Re: [Serusers] problem with compiling the new CVS release<BR>
> >> ><BR>
> >> > Hello,<BR>
> >> ><BR>
> >> > Get the code from the 2.0 branch:<BR>
> >> ><BR>
> >> > cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@cvs.berlios.de:/cvsroot/ser checkout -r<BR>
> >> rel_2_0_0 sip_router<BR>
> >> ><BR>
> >> > Jan.<BR>
> >> ><BR>
> >> > İlker Aktuna (Koç.net) wrote:<BR>
> >> > > Hi Michal,<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > > Thank you for your reply.<BR>
> >> > > I didn't understand what to do. Should I add the option to the<BR>
> >> command "cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@cvs.berlios.de:/cvsroot/ser<BR>
> >> checkout sip_router" ?<BR>
> >> > > I gues not, because it does not accept that parameter.<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > > What should I do now ?<BR>
> >> > > Should I download a stable version ? Where can I find a stable<BR>
> >> version with presence support ?<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > > In fact, I only need the new registrar module which includes<BR>
> >> "nat_flag" parameter.<BR>
> >> > > But when I just add the new registrar module to my old sources, I<BR>
> >> can't compile it.<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > > Thanks,<BR>
> >> > > ilker<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > > -----Original Message-----<BR>
> >> > > From: Michal Matyska [mailto:michal@iptel.org]<BR>
> >> > > Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2007 10:01 PM<BR>
> >> > > To: İlker Aktuna (Koç.net)<BR>
> >> > > Cc: serusers@iptel.org<BR>
> >> > > Subject: Re: [Serusers] problem with compiling the new CVS release<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > > Hi,<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > > Sorry for the inconvinience... checkout the CVS code before the DB<BR>
> >> API started to change (e.g. add -D 20070328 option to the cvs co<BR>
> >> command).<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > > Until all modules will be changed and using new API, it won't<BR>
> >> compile for a while.<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > > Michal<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> > > On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 11:48 +0200, Jan Janak wrote:<BR>
> >> > >> Folks,<BR>
> >> > >><BR>
> >> > >> I have been working on a new database abstraction layer for SER<BR>
> >> for a<BR>
> >> > >> while and I'll start commiting it in CVS now. Please excuse me if<BR>
> >> > >> something is broken temporarily, this is a major improvement that<BR>
> >> > >> touches all modules that use the database. This change does not<BR>
> >> > >> affect Ottendorf, of course. The new DB layer will appear in 2.1<BR>
> >> > >><BR>
> >> > >> The main objectives for doing major changes in the DB API are:<BR>
> >> > >><BR>
> >> > >> 1) Better support for databases that are not based on SQL, like<BR>
> >> > >> Berkeley db, LDAP, and fas in-memory databases.<BR>
> >> > >><BR>
> >> > >> 2) The new code will no more store fetch all data from the database<BR>
> >> > >> in one step, it will be possible to get the data row by row<BR>
> >> (common<BR>
> >> > >> problem in usrloc)<BR>
> >> > >><BR>
> >> > >> 3) Support for queries over multiple databases with various<BR>
> >> strategies<BR>
> >> > >> (i.e. usrloc database can be partitioned).<BR>
> >> > >><BR>
> >> > >> 4) Support for database failover (i.e. if the primary database fails<BR>
> >> > >> that SER can start using another one, which can be even of<BR>
> >> different<BR>
> >> > >> type, i.e. mysql->postgres)<BR>
> >> > >><BR>
> >> > >> I provide you with more details and documentation later once the<BR>
> >> > >> first version is in CVS.<BR>
> >> > >><BR>
> >> > >> Jan.<BR>
> >> > >><BR>
> >> > >> _______________________________________________<BR>
> >> > >> Serdev mailing list<BR>
> >> > >> Serdev@lists.iptel.org<BR>
> >> > >> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev<BR>
> >> > ><BR>
> >> ______________________________________________________________________<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> _______________________________________________<BR>
> >> Serusers mailing list<BR>
> >> Serusers@lists.iptel.org<BR>
> >> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers<BR>
> >><BR>
> > <BR>
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
> > <BR>
> > _______________________________________________<BR>
> > Serusers mailing list<BR>
> > Serusers@lists.iptel.org<BR>
> > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers<BR>
> <BR>
> _______________________________________________<BR>
> Serusers mailing list<BR>
> Serusers@lists.iptel.org<BR>
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers<BR>
</html>