dev  

Messages by Thread

• • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Nathan Hartman
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Karl Fogel
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Karl Fogel
  • Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format (was: Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525).) Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format (was: Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525).) Branko Čibej
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format (was: Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525).) Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Branko Čibej
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Branko Čibej
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Nathan Hartman
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Nathan Hartman
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Martin Edgar Furter Rathod
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Nathan Hartman
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Glossary of attacks (was: Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format) Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Karl Fogel
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Nathan Hartman
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Nathan Hartman
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Branko Čibej
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: Switching from SHA1 to a checksum type without known collisions in 1.15 working copy format Nathan Hartman
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Karl Fogel
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Nathan Hartman
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Karl Fogel
  • Re: Getting to first release of pristines-on-demand feature (#525). Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Karl Fogel
  • Linking to the archives (was: Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects.) Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Nathan Hartman
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Karl Fogel
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Karl Fogel
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Karl Fogel
  • Sharing .svn directories across wc's (was: Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects.) Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Sharing .svn directories across wc's (was: Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects.) Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: Sharing .svn directories across wc's (was: Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects.) Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: Sharing .svn directories across wc's (was: Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects.) Branko Čibej
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Karl Fogel
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Karl Fogel
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Karl Fogel
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Nathan Hartman
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A two-part vision for Subversion and large binary objects. Daniel Shahaf
• Broken pipe on the diff command with --diff-cmd Vincent Lefevre
  • Re: Broken pipe on the diff command with --diff-cmd Nathan Hartman
  • Re: Broken pipe on the diff command with --diff-cmd Vincent Lefevre
• Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Nathan Hartman
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Mark Phippard
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Branko Čibej
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Mark Phippard
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Nathan Hartman
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Mark Phippard
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Nathan Hartman
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Nathan Hartman
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Barry
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Martin Edgar Furter Rathod
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Branko Čibej
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Robby Zinchak
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Karl Fogel
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Dr. Thomas Orgis
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Karl Fogel
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Stefan Sperling
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Karl Fogel
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Mark Phippard
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Karl Fogel
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Mark Phippard
  • [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. (was: Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?!) Karl Fogel
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. (was: Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?!) Mark Phippard
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. (was: Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?!) Nathan Hartman
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Karl Fogel
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Mark Phippard
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Karl Fogel
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Mark Phippard
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Mark Phippard
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Nathan Hartman
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Evgeny Kotkov via dev
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Nathan Hartman
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again. Nathan Hartman
  • [VOTE] Reverting r1845377 (Was: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again.) Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: [VOTE] Reverting r1845377 (Was: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again.) Johan Corveleyn
  • Re: [VOTE] Reverting r1845377 (Was: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again.) Branko Čibej
  • Re: [VOTE] Reverting r1845377 (Was: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again.) Branko Čibej
  • Re: [VOTE] Reverting r1845377 (Was: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again.) Mark Phippard
  • Re: [VOTE] Reverting r1845377 (Was: [PROPOSAL] Allow plaintext passwords again.) Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Bernard Boudet
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Karl Fogel
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?! Daniel Sahlberg
  • Subversion on Solaris (was Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?!) Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: Subversion on Solaris (was Re: A strong WTF on compiling out plaintext password support by default?!) Johan Corveleyn
• Re: svn commit: r1892471 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion: libsvn_client/conflicts.c libsvn_wc/wc_db.c tests/cmdline/merge_tree_conflict_tests.py Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: svn commit: r1892471 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion: libsvn_client/conflicts.c libsvn_wc/wc_db.c tests/cmdline/merge_tree_conflict_tests.py Stefan Sperling
  • Re: svn commit: r1892471 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion: libsvn_client/conflicts.c libsvn_wc/wc_db.c tests/cmdline/merge_tree_conflict_tests.py Daniel Sahlberg
• Re: A more permanent home for the add-a-password-to-a-cached-username script? (was: Re: using svn cli with --non-interactive (in scripts) securely, without exposing password) Barry
  • Re: A more permanent home for the add-a-password-to-a-cached-username script? (was: Re: using svn cli with --non-interactive (in scripts) securely, without exposing password) Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: A more permanent home for the add-a-password-to-a-cached-username script? (was: Re: using svn cli with --non-interactive (in scripts) securely, without exposing password) Barry Scott
  • Re: A more permanent home for the add-a-password-to-a-cached-username script? (was: Re: using svn cli with --non-interactive (in scripts) securely, without exposing password) Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: A more permanent home for the add-a-password-to-a-cached-username script? (was: Re: using svn cli with --non-interactive (in scripts) securely, without exposing password) Daniel Sahlberg
• Re: [PATCH] Issue #4711 Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: [PATCH] Issue #4711 Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: [PATCH] Issue #4711 Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: [PATCH] Issue #4711 Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: [PATCH] Issue #4711 Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: [PATCH] Issue #4711 Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: [PATCH] Issue #4711 Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: [PATCH] Issue #4711 Daniel Shahaf
  • Re: [PATCH] Issue #4711 invalid xml file produced by svn log --xml -g --search Daniel Sahlberg
  • Re: [PATCH] Issue #4711 invalid xml file produced by svn log --xml -g --search Daniel Sahlberg
• Re: [PATCH] Fix libsvn_ra_serf build with external serf Alexandr Miloslavskiy

• Later messages