Re: [videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov: brahvo]

From: videbaek (videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov)
Date: Sat Jul 22 2000 - 14:59:39 EDT

  • Next message: Flemming Videbaek: "small update to brat/test" 

    Konstantin,

I know we talked today. So just as a general comment
if an 'update' from CVS is done changes should obviously not be lost, but be merged appropriately.

/fv
------------------------------
 

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Konstantin Olchanski 
  To: brahms-dev-l@bnl.gov 
  Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2000 3:23 PM
  Subject: [videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov: brahvo]



  - Forwarded message from Flemming Videbaek <videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov> -
  From: "Flemming Videbaek" <videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov>
  To: <tofw-l@bnl.gov>
  Cc: "Konstantin Olchanski" <olchansk@bnl.gov>
  Subject: brahvo
  Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 18:35:55 -0500

  I restored the value of slats from 126 to 166. Somehow the values which was in a brahvo.cc (but not checked back to CVS)
  had not ben propagated when the newer brahvo code was brought in.
  The TOFW wall is now reasonable ok except for the 8 slats 'dead' tdc.
  ----- End forwarded message -----


  Were these changes checked into CVS? If not, they will be lost *again*
  the next time I rebuild brahvo.


  -- 
  Konstantin Olchanski
  Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Long Island, New York
  olchansk@bnl.gov

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 22 2000 - 18:34:14 EDT