Testing the (move to emeritus) and (move to active) with the one emeritus request we have:
Move to emeritus: No errors reported. The file was not moved from emeritus-requests-received to emeritus. The entry in members.txt was moved to the wrong place. The active member count was not adjusted. Move to active: No errors reported. The entry in members.txt was moved to the wrong place. The active member count was not adjusted. Back to drawing cartoons. Craig > On Jul 11, 2020, at 12:11 PM, Craig Russell <apache....@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Sebb, > > Does this mean that multiUpdate will now work with multiple directory roots, > or is there still an update needed for svnmucc in svn.rb? > > Thanks, > Craig > >> On Jul 11, 2020, at 6:59 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 at 08:56, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 2020/07/10 15:05:05, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> ... >>>> Of course this will only be needed if the permission issue is not sorted. >>> >>> With the help of Humbedooh, I believe we have sorted out the permissions. I >>> was able to do this via svnmucc, but that was because of elevated >>> permissions. A Member with access to the pair of directories could not (due >>> to limited access to the root dir). Changing the permissions was easier >>> than changing the httpd configuration to force authn (lack of, appeared to >>> be a root cause). >>> >>> I've added a new block to the authz template, and perms for the secretary >>> group. It is loaded on the svn server now. Please give it a shot. >> >> A dual svnmucc put worked for me. >> >>> Cheers, >>> Greg >>> InfraAdmin, ASF > > Craig L Russell > c...@apache.org > Craig L Russell c...@apache.org
