[FFmpeg-cvslog] r19321 - branches/0.5/doc/ffmpeg-doc.texi

[Jai Menon]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Diego Biurrun<diego at biurrun.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 01:46:41PM +0000, Jai Menon wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Robert Swain<robert.swain at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 15:14:07 +0200, Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de>
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 01:25:23PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
>> >> > On date Friday 2009-07-03 11:19:27 +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>> >> > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 10:14:19PM +0200, stefano wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Log:
>> >> > > > Update ffmpeg documentation regarding metadata setting. -title,
>> >> > > > -author, -copyright, -track, -album, and -year options have been
>> >> > > > dropped in favor of -metadata.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Backfix of r19285, r19287, and r19320.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Modified:
>> >> > > > ? ?branches/0.5/doc/ffmpeg-doc.texi
>> >> > >
>> >> > > It seems I didn't flame hard enough the last time around. ?One
>> >> > > more try:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Stop "backporting" unapproved patches to the 0.5 branch THIS
>> >> > > FUCKING INSTANT! ?Much less if you haven't bothered to RTFM to
>> >> > > find out how to do it properly. ?Now revert this mess.
>> >> >
>> >> > Done.
>> >> >
>> >> > Now, would you be kind enough to explain which is the procedure to
>> >> > follow for making backports?
>> >>
>> >> As I said, RTFM.
>> >
>> > Stefano is trying to be helpful and improve the quality of the
>> > release.
>> >
>> > As far as I can discover from trunk or the branch, we don't have any
>> > documented procedure for backporting changes to the release branch.
>> > Grepping the entire trees case insensitively for 'backport', 'branch'
>> > or 'release' throws nothing relevant. This suggests there is no manual
>> > to read on such. Where is it documented?
>>
>> I think he probably meant http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/ch04s03.html
>
> This is for Subversion 1.1, older than my grandma...

Well the relevant section "Why Not Use Patches Instead?" is mostly
identical. Anyway, you are correct.


-- 
Regards,

Jai