|
||||||||
|
This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira |
||||||||
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Issues" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jenkinsci-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
We too experienced these issues.
During an earlier import from another repository, 45378 revisions had been left without a svn:date property, which caused the HTTP 500 error.
The svn:date properties were fixed using the set-svn-date script from http://docs.codehaus.org/display/HAUSMATES/Could+not+access+revision+times
(BTW: If you are going to use that script, you have to fix generate_propsets to take in an URL parameter)
This is still a major problem, as we cannot prevent this from happening again while allowing our developers to do svn revprop changes (which is necessary).
I think this logic of using revision datestamps is severely flawed, because you cannot trust the timestamps in any way!
Even if you make sure that every revision has an svn:date timestamp, there are several scenarios which can result in an inconsistent timeline.
The revision numbers are "right there" and easy to get, and they are guaranteed to be consistent - why not use them?