| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:54 |
AD7six |
alkemann: http://thechaw.com/forks/AD7six/bakery/commits/view/43fdaf34e7f4c6610c470f88c98181561e5a7c0b |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:37 |
alkemann |
AD7six: i think u should just delete what u got, do a new git init and add the main repo as origin remote. then git pulling will get both master and 2.0.x.x |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:37 |
ADmad |
yeah for me too its just "2.0.x.x" |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:36 |
AD7six |
probably a syntax mistake on mypart |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:36 |
ADmad |
if origin/2.0.x.x is your working branch shouldnt you just do "git pull" to update ? |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:36 |
alkemann |
says only "master" and "2.0.x.x" when i do git branch on my comp |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:35 |
AD7six |
don't know/remember. |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:35 |
alkemann |
creating* |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:35 |
alkemann |
u use the --track option when creting it? |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:35 |
AD7six |
warning: refname 'origin/2.0.x.x' is ambiguous. |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:35 |
AD7six |
andy@andy-fuji:~/dev/apps/bakery2$ git checkout origin/2.0.x.x |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:35 |
AD7six |
but it's the name of my local branch afaik |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:34 |
alkemann |
origin meaning remote on thechaw. i think that is correct |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:34 |
AD7six |
"origin"/2.0.x.x ? |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:34 |
AD7six |
origin/2.0.x.x |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:34 |
AD7six |
* master |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:34 |
AD7six |
is my local branch misnamed? andy@andy-fuji:~/dev/apps/bakery2$ git branch |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:33 |
alkemann |
ok, lets get stuff merged then :) |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:32 |
alkemann |
sounds good,. the one in my branch is messy |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:32 |
ADmad |
alkemann: there shouldnt be much more than that... as AD7six said he did all the schema changes we discussed on his fork |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:32 |
AD7six |
it's more generic and in most respects from my pov simpler |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:31 |
alkemann |
but if u got a better schema we can go from, thats great |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:31 |
alkemann |
ADmad has been adding and removing modified and created, but other than that the logs isnt telling me much |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:30 |
alkemann |
i think the one i have now comes mostly from existing bakery |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:29 |
AD7six |
I assume |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:29 |
AD7six |
you're saying you had a schema, and it's different |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:28 |
alkemann |
i dont follow |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:27 |
AD7six |
except for the revisions table (maybe) the rest should be about the same as you already had, no? |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:27 |
alkemann |
hm.. or the history link on thechaw doesnt work correctly. it shows history on wrong branch |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:26 |
alkemann |
im pretty sure i had a db that matched the spec at some point but it looks like it wasnt commited :/ |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:25 |
alkemann |
i c |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:23 |
AD7six |
which was a proposal, not set in stone - but should be a better fit. |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:22 |
AD7six |
the previous discussion went into the schema in my fork |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:22 |
alkemann |
http://thechaw.com/bakery/source/branches/2.0.x.x/config/sql/schema.php |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:20 |
AD7six |
alkemann: which schema are you looking at |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:11 |
alkemann |
i think once we get mocks and use cases, we should use them as a basis for a go through of the spec and nail it down so we can get this thing going |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:06 |
alkemann |
i dont think it's up to specc either |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:06 |
alkemann |
articles table looks messy tbh |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:05 |
alkemann |
and with schemas and the DummyData plugn, my db is back and looking operational :) |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:02 |
AD7six |
the plugin will still need some work or maybe even rewriting - the code is based on my user_account behavior which blurs the CM line a bit. |
| # |
Mar 9th 2009, 15:01 |
alkemann |
ok |