Comment 1 Malgorzata Janczarska 2011-08-12 12:40:30 EDT

Created attachment 201414 [details]
Backport

This is a backport fix

Comment 2 Tomasz Zarna 2011-08-16 08:08:56 EDT

(In reply to bug 354593, comment 27)
>  Could you verify the fix once the n-build with it is out i.e. tomorrow morning?

Eddie, have you managed to download a build with the fix and verify it? It's getting late for contributions to 3.7.1 and we don't think the patch is safe enough for SR1. However, as usually in such cases, I can provide you a patched bundle which you can install into your Eclipse or use with your product. The bundle would be exactly the same as it was in 3.7.1. After 3.7.2 is shipped you could switch to the official release.

Comment 3 Eddie Galvez 2011-08-16 10:44:30 EDT

(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to bug 354593, comment 27)
> >  Could you verify the fix once the n-build with it is out i.e. tomorrow morning?
> 
> Eddie, have you managed to download a build with the fix and verify it? It's
> getting late for contributions to 3.7.1 and we don't think the patch is safe
> enough for SR1. However, as usually in such cases, I can provide you a patched
> bundle which you can install into your Eclipse or use with your product. The
> bundle would be exactly the same as it was in 3.7.1. After 3.7.2 is shipped you
> could switch to the official release.

Hi Tomas -- sorry, I didn't see any "could you verify the fix one the n-build with it is out" message anywhere (comment #27? we only have 2 comments here), or I would have.

I'd be happy to verify w/ a build, it's so easy to reproduce and always reproduces. If you could tell me the exact build, as all I see that I would think is for me to test is M20110810-0800 3.7.x stream build, but it says Aug 10 (http://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/M20110810-0800/index.php)

Comment 4 Tomasz Zarna 2011-08-16 11:31:46 EDT

(In reply to comment #3)
> Hi Tomas -- sorry, I didn't see any "could you verify the fix one the n-build
> with it is out" message anywhere (comment #27? we only have 2 comments here)

Sorry, I meant bug 348787, comment 27. I miscopied the bug number.

> I'd be happy to verify w/ a build, it's so easy to reproduce and always
> reproduces. If you could tell me the exact build, as all I see that I would
> think is for me to test is M20110810-0800 3.7.x stream build, but it says Aug 10

The fix is currently in HEAD only so you can verify it h an N-build. You can pick any starting with N20110810-2000 (e.g. http://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/downloads/drops/N20110811-2000/index.php)

Comment 5 Szymon Brandys 2011-08-17 07:32:51 EDT

(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to bug 354593, comment 27)
> >  Could you verify the fix once the n-build with it is out i.e. tomorrow morning?
> 
> Eddie, have you managed to download a build with the fix and verify it? It's
> getting late for contributions to 3.7.1 and we don't think the patch is safe
> enough for SR1. However, as usually in such cases, I can provide you a patched
> bundle which you can install into your Eclipse or use with your product. The
> bundle would be exactly the same as it was in 3.7.1. After 3.7.2 is shipped you
> could switch to the official release.

I'm suggesting to move the fix to SR2. And as said, Tomek will provide a patched bundle if required.

Comment 6 Eddie Galvez 2011-08-17 13:23:42 EDT

oh well.

OK, as we complete our compare extension for release in our upcoming version, I'll see if we can do anything to 'workaround' this bug (IIRC our quick scan of things looked like we couldn't, but on another bug it was suggested that the subversive team were able to); if we can't, we'll ask for a patched bundle.

Comment 7 Sarah Gerweck 2011-08-19 08:32:02 EDT

I think it's a big mistake to push this out to 3.7.2. Merging conflicts has been broken and unfixed since 3.7 came out, and now you're doing a new release and not fixing it even though you have a patch in hand?

Well I guess it's not as if most developers use Subversion or NPEs make your developers look incompetent. So I can see why you'd leave this broken.

Comment 8 Szymon Brandys 2011-08-19 10:16:27 EDT

(In reply to comment #7)
> I think it's a big mistake to push this out to 3.7.2. Merging conflicts has been
> broken and unfixed since 3.7 came out, and now you're doing a new release and
> not fixing it even though you have a patch in hand?
> 
> Well I guess it's not as if most developers use Subversion or NPEs make your
> developers look incompetent. So I can see why you'd leave this broken.

The problem can be fixed either in Subversive or in Platform/Team. According to Alexander the fix is available in Subversive now, see bug 348787, comment 11. Indeed we have a fix for Platform/Team, however looking again at bug 348787, comment 11 it is not really needed to backport it now to 3.7.2.

Moreover the Platform/Team fix is fresh and has not settled down yet, thus we decided to backport it to 3.7.2.

Comment 9 Szymon Brandys 2011-08-19 10:18:16 EDT

(In reply to comment #8)
> The problem can be fixed either in Subversive or in Platform/Team. According to
> Alexander the fix is available in Subversive now, see bug 348787, comment 11.
> Indeed we have a fix for Platform/Team, however looking again at bug 348787,
> comment 11 it is not really needed to backport it now to 3.7.2.

I meant 3.7.1.

Comment 10 Alexander Gurov 2011-08-21 01:39:26 EDT

(In reply to comment #8)
That is right. We have applied patched Subversive version to the Indigo SR1 (it will appear starting from RC2 milestone). So, I think it should be fine anyways.

Comment 11 Alexander Gurov 2011-08-24 12:29:01 EDT

*** Bug 355714 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 12 Alexander Gurov 2011-08-24 12:29:26 EDT

*** Bug 355722 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 13 Alexander Gurov 2011-08-27 02:26:35 EDT

*** Bug 355803 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 14 Alexander Gurov 2011-08-30 14:42:28 EDT

*** Bug 356122 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 15 Alexander Gurov 2011-09-01 09:21:17 EDT

*** Bug 356295 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 16 Alexander Gurov 2011-09-01 09:21:55 EDT

*** Bug 356413 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 17 Mario Charest 2011-09-01 09:41:13 EDT

Removed from CC

Comment 18 Remy Suen 2011-09-09 09:16:07 EDT

*** Bug 357219 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 19 Alexander Gurov 2011-09-11 03:18:15 EDT

*** Bug 356973 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 20 Alexander Gurov 2011-09-11 03:18:54 EDT

*** Bug 356871 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 21 Alexander Gurov 2011-09-11 03:19:14 EDT

*** Bug 356717 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 22 Alexander Gurov 2011-09-25 01:20:43 EDT

*** Bug 358624 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 23 Alexander Gurov 2011-09-25 01:21:09 EDT

*** Bug 358774 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 24 Alexander Gurov 2011-09-25 01:21:30 EDT

*** Bug 358267 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 25 Alexander Gurov 2011-10-18 07:29:41 EDT

*** Bug 360489 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 26 Alexander Gurov 2011-10-18 07:30:01 EDT

*** Bug 360214 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 27 Alexander Gurov 2011-11-01 14:10:45 EDT

*** Bug 362534 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 28 Malgorzata Janczarska 2011-11-08 09:13:53 EST

Created attachment 206591 [details]
Backport

Comment 29 Malgorzata Janczarska 2011-11-08 09:25:23 EST

Created attachment 206594 [details]
Backport

Comment 30 Tomasz Zarna 2011-11-09 05:34:46 EST

Fixed with 77e191005304a575da09fac8c7f2eb01ed8e4ed6.