fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Veqryn
Administrator
SGB,

I just was checking something on the repository.  It appears that the fixes you made for 1.2.5.5 were not made to the Trunk as well.  They were only made to the 1.2.5.5 branch, instead of also being added to the trunk (which will be 1.2.6.0).

I could be wrong i guess, but here is what i see:


revision # 2787 was applied to the trunk. (changing only ServerMessenger.java)
revision # 2788 & 2789 * 2791 created the branch 1.2.5.5 out of 1.2.5.4
revision # 2790 was applied only to the 1.2.5.5 branch (changing the ServerMessenger.java to match the change in revision2787, but also creating the "logs" folder with 1 new file, and "access_logs" folder with 2 files)
revision # 2792 was applied only to the 1.2.5.5 branch (changing ChatPlayerPanel.java)
revision # 2793 was applied only to the 1.2.5.5 branch (changing GameData.java)
revision # 2794 was applied only to the 1.2.5.5 branch (changing LobbyLoginValidator.java)

I double checked these by looking at the TRUNK (what will become 1.2.6.0), and confirmed that the changes were missing from the trunk.

Therefore, you need to apply the changes that were done in the following revisions to the Trunk:
2790
2792
2793
2794


thanks sgb,
veqryn
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

​
I also noticed that while looking through the source code.

I guess it's not a big deal, though, since this will automatically be corrected when the next version comes out.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Veqryn
Administrator
how exactly will it be automatically corrected when the next version comes out?

the point here is that it will NOT be corrected when the next version comes out, as the next version is the "trunk" and the only thing included in the "trunk" is the stuff already in the trunk, and the trunk does not include 1.2.5.5, which is a "branch".

that is why these things must be added to the next version, because they are currently not in the next version
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

​
I may be wrong, but wouldn't the local code on SGB's computer overwrite the incorrect trunk code once he makes an update and commits his local code?

In other words, I think the reason the trunk is inaccurate is because he forgot to commit the updated code to the trunk, instead he just committed it to the branch. So once he makes an update and commits the accurate, local code to the trunk, the problem will be fixed.

So from how I see it, this problem will be fixed if:

1. SGB makes an update later on and commits the code to the trunk.
2. SGB commits the correct code to the trunk right now.
3. CKev makes an update later USING THE the 1_2_5_5 code as the base code and commits the code to the trunk.
4. CKev does a 'Check Out' on the 1_2_5_5 code branch and commits that code to the trunk right now.

If I'm wrong, please correct me...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Veqryn
Administrator
why do you have no name?  are you wisc?

and yes, the point of this post is to remind SGB to commit those changes to the Trunk.

and no, sgb may not have added these changes to the trunk on his own computer, otherwise he would have already committed those changes to the trunk.

so the purpose of this thread is to remind sgb and/or kev to commit those changes to the trunk, since they may or may not be aware that those changes only occurred to the 1.2.5.5 branch.
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

​
1. I do have a name, it's just invisible.

2. Yes, I am.

3. I know SGB or CKev must commit the correct code to the Trunk somehow, I'm just saying that if SGB made the mistake I'm thinking of, the online trunk will automatically be fixed the next time he commits the triplea code.

4. Couldn't he have made the change to the local trunk but forgotten to commit the local trunk to the online trunk once he was done?

5. If 4 is correct, then the online trunk directory will be fixed when SGB makes the next online trunk commit.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Veqryn
Administrator
3. the trunk does not automatically pull code from branches, that would defeat the purpose of having a branch.  kev has done many commits since the branch was created, none of them automatically pulled any code.


4. yes he could have, but any time you commit, you tend to commit all the changes.  and if he forgot to then, he could forget again since he isn't active anymore.



wisc.... go read my first post again.  it really is way simpler than you think.
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Wisconsin
3. I'm not saying it automatically pulls code from the branches, I'm saying the regular process of committing the latest code to the trunk should fix any problems with the current trunk.

4. The first change in the list you showed was part of a separate fix SGB did. The server messenger revision fixed an issue with message headers that I found initially. SGB fixed the bug and released TripleA unstable 1_2_5_5. I then found another bug with the lobby login validator and told SGB. He fixed it without releasing another version, and apparently updated the 1.2.5.5 branch instead of the trunk.

So each time an update is made to the code, SGB commits the new source code into the online trunk. He also commits the code to the branch each time he releases a version of TripleA. This last time was an exception, where he accidentally updated the branch instead of the trunk. (I think...)

So lets simplify this whole thing so we can be sure we're talking about the same thing. Let's say there is one file with one letter. History:

Version 1.2.5.4 Released.
     Actual Release: A
     Online Trunk: A
     Local Code: A
     Online 1.2.5.4 Branch: A

Bug discovered. Version 1.2.5.5 Released.
    Actual Release: B
    Online Trunk: B
    Local Code: B
    Online 1.2.5.5 Branch: B

Another bug discovered. No version released.
    Actual Release: (No New Release)
    Online Trunk: B (Should be updated to C)
    Local Code: C
    Online 1.2.5.5 Branch: C (Should still be B)

So the next time SGB makes an update, the source code content will be:
    Actual Release: D
    Online Trunk: D
    Local Code: D
    Online 1.2.6.0 Branch: D

This whole thing isn't a big deal, though, so whether you want to continue talking about it or not is up to you.

Thanks,
    Wisconsin
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Veqryn
Administrator
yes, except that D (1.2.6.0) does not include the updates in C, unless someone actually includes them, which is the point of this thread.
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Maherdogg
In reply to this post by Wisconsin
I wish people were putting this much effort into scrambling etc :)  
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Veqryn
Administrator
maher, we get the point already, no need to mention it in every single thread.
if i could code it, it would be done already, but i don't know any java
the people who do know java and can code, have busy lives,
sgb has taken a break, possibly for a long time, from triplea
and comradekev is making updates to the engine every couple weeks, and conversing with me about bug reports
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Wisconsin
In reply to this post by Veqryn
Wouldn't the missed C changes become included once he commits the code for the next version, though?

Since his local code includes the C changes(I believe), the changes will go online once he commits his local code. (Which will happen after he makes a another code update)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

too lazy to log in
I have a device here on the table next to me, intended primarily for my relationship:
The UTD (Unnecessary Tension Detector).
It started to give a slight rhythmic clicking sound since I started reading this thread...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Maherdogg
In reply to this post by Veqryn
you got it, next time I'll just let you two keep on slap fighting like the special olympics retards you were impersonating.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Veqryn
Administrator
In reply to this post by too lazy to log in
lol
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixes made to server and user-node validation on 1.2.5.5 have not been applied to upcoming unstable of 1.2.6.0

Sean Bridges
Administrator
checked in to trunk, I had checked them into the branch accidently.  Thanks for reminding me.