Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> writes: > Right. That pretty much summarizes my feeling. I don't want to respond > in-line since you summarize it well: without real-life examples, we > have nothing to work against here.
So I've put some of the concerns in the issue tracker: http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3979 http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3980 http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3981 Should I raise others? Serf makes lots of requests that might look like a DOS attack? Serf increases the server logging? Is it useful to have things like that as issues? > Yet... we have seen bugs crop up over the past week in a number of > other areas (merge? mod_dav_svn? log? fs txns?). We accept those as > normal. They're fixed and backported. This is how we should be > operating on ra_serf, too. There is nothing special about it. We don't have an alternative merge implementation, or an alternative to mod_dav_svn, etc. If we did then there would be pressure to switch. -- uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy http://www.uberSVN.com
