On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 8:11 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> wrote: > Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 5:23 AM, <cmpil...@apache.org> wrote: >>> Author: cmpilato >>> Date: Thu Feb 25 02:23:24 2010 >>> New Revision: 916089 >>> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=916089&view=rev >>> Log: >>> On the '1.6.x-issue-3242-partial' branch, merge (with heavy conflict >>> resolution) r879762, r880472, and r880579 from old 'issue-3242-dev' >>> branch (which see for log message information). >>> >>> These changes represent a subset of the changes I made on that branch >>> for issue 3242. Specifically, these changes cause the >>> mergeinfo-querying helper functions to not forcibly operate against >>> the repository root URL, but to operate instead against the RA >>> session's current URL (which is generally going to be something that >>> is readable by the accessing user). >>> >> Wow, Michael you are reading my mind! I've started backporting >> issue-3242 fix just yesterday evening :) Thanks! > > If you want to see the rest of the backport through to completion, that's > great. But I don't know that you'll get the most bang for the buck > backporting my "let's rework the entirety of the copy code" stuff. I'd > rather you focus your effort on reviewing the backport proposal as it > stands. :-) > > I reviewed it and wondered why you didn't backport unit test?
-- Ivan Zhakov VisualSVN Team
