new branch?

[Ben Abbott]

On Jun 3, 2009, at 10:32 AM, Ben Abbott wrote:

> On Jun 3, 2009, at 10:19 AM, Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Ben Abbott <bpabbott at mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jun 3, 2009, at 10:09 AM, Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Ben Abbott <bpabbott at mac.com>  
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> John / Jaroslav,
>>>>>
>>>>> I see an unexpected branch in the sources at rev 9284. The  
>>>>> branch is more
>>>>> like a stub as it only contains two changesets. Both of them are  
>>>>> mine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Revision: 9285
>>>>> Branch: default
>>>>> Author: Ben Abbott <bpabbott at mac.com>  2009-05-29 21:46:43
>>>>> Committer: Ben Abbott <bpabbott at mac.com>  2009-05-29 21:46:43
>>>>> Parent: 9284:d8becc6d0a18 (__scatter__.m: If the color spec is  
>>>>> empty, set
>>>>> using __next_line_color__.)
>>>>>
>>>>>  __gnuplot_has_feature__.m: Change version for  
>>>>> "x11_figure_position"
>>>>> from
>>>>> ">=4.3.0" to ">=4.2.5".
>>>>>
>>>>> Revision: 9284
>>>>> Branch: default
>>>>> Author: Ben Abbott <bpabbott at mac.com>  2009-05-29 20:46:34
>>>>> Committer: Ben Abbott <bpabbott at mac.com>  2009-05-29 20:46:34
>>>>> Parent: 9283:38ad8c99d6a2 (__gnuplot_get_var__.m: insert missing
>>>>> semicolon)
>>>>> Child:  9285:692c5a6ab019 (__gnuplot_has_feature__.m: Change  
>>>>> version for
>>>>> "x11_figure_position" from ">=4.3.0" to ">=4.2.5".)
>>>>>
>>>>>  __scatter__.m: If the color spec is empty, set using
>>>>> __next_line_color__.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not very good with mercurial, and am only came across the  
>>>>> problem
>>>>> when I
>>>>> did "hg view".
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you see these changesets in your archive?
>>>>>
>>>>> Ben
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, I think neither of these is present, at least the IDs can't be
>>>> found. Probably you pulled and forgot to merge or rebase  
>>>> (rebasing is
>>>> preferred).
>>>>
>>>> regards
>>>
>>> Ok. Thanks. I'll try to fix my end tomorrow and then push these  
>>> changes.
>>>
>>> Ben
>>
>> Are they worth getting into 3.2.0? I've set up Friday as the release
>> day, and I want to avoid further delay if possible,
>> but there's still time to make rc8 tomorrow. However, if you think
>> they deserve testing, we better keep them for 3.2.1.
>>
>> cheers
>
> These are both trivial changes. I doubt they'd cause any problems,  
> so I'd recommend they be included.
>
> I'll push them as soon as I can and you can judge what is appropriate.
>
> Ben

ok, I cheated and deleted my primary archive, pulled a fresh copy,  
recreated the changesets and pushed.

Ben