On 27.02.2015 23:44, Bert Huijben wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Branko Čibej [mailto:br...@wandisco.com] >> Sent: vrijdag 27 februari 2015 21:05 >> To: dev@subversion.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch? >> >> On 24.02.2015 21:49, Bert Huijben wrote: >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Ben Reser [mailto:b...@reser.org] >>>> Sent: dinsdag 24 februari 2015 18:53 >>>> To: Subversion Development >>>> Subject: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch? >>>> >>>> I know that Bert has made a lot of changes he'd like to include in 1.9 on >>>> trunk. At this point since we haven't cut a release candidate I'd like to >>>> propose that we just do a catchup merge excluding anything we really don't >>>> want. I believe at this point that would just be the version bumpage. >>> +1 >>> >>> I hadn't expect this much agreement, or I wouldn't have spent the day >>> cutting >> the changes into backport suggestions. Luckily that is a good way to review >> your >> own changes... >> >> Bert, I think we're more or less waiting for you to say you're ready to >> do the catch-up merge. > I don't expect any really big things to happen soon. (Or I must find > something serious again :( ) > > That status didn't support some tree conflicts is a really nasty problem, > that also affects 1.8.x. > (And as our conflict resolver and commit both use status as their source, we > just forgot to update moves and nobody noticed) > > I found some cases where 'svn delete' overly aggressive removes all conflicts > (even from layers unaffected by the delete), but I don't think we have to > wait for that.
I interpret that as "+1" and did the catch-up merge in r1662916. 1.9.x is now closed for backports except release blockers until we roll the Beta. -- Brane
