--- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Matt Benson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Wow, I just saw that the changes I committed on
> > LeadPipeInputStream for 1.6.2 never went to HEAD,
>
> 8-)
>
> I thought somebody removed code and I put it back
> for backwards
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wow, I just saw that the changes I committed on
> LeadPipeInputStream for 1.6.2 never went to HEAD,
8-)
I thought somebody removed code and I put it back for backwards
compatibility - I was hacking offline. IIRC I didn't merge
everyth
Wow, I just saw that the changes I committed on
LeadPipeInputStream for 1.6.2 never went to HEAD,
sorry you had to put all that stuff back but thanks!
:)
-Matt
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mo
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let me address the second one first:
>
>> (2) Names again.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> is a that doesn't allow dir to be
>> set. It implicitly contains s for all the files that
>> have
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On 20 Jan 2005, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Allow to keep files in target even if they are not in any
> > source directories, PR 21832
>
> Two things:
Let me address the second one first:
> (2) Names again.
>
>
>
>
On 20 Jan 2005, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Allow to keep files in target even if they are not in any
> source directories, PR 21832
Two things:
(1) Dominique, could you please try a build of CVS HEAD (doesn't
necessarily have to be any more recent than a month or so) on one
of your larger
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Hmm, maybe we can speed up DirectoryScanner to make it recognize
> >> "constant patterns",
> >
> > If you can achieve that, then I don't have objections any more.
>
> Before you think I'd drop the ball. Yes, I think I can achieve that
> and wi
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hmm, maybe we can speed up DirectoryScanner to make it recognize
>> "constant patterns",
>
> If you can achieve that, then I don't have objections any more.
Before you think I'd drop the ball. Yes, I think I can achieve that
a
> We will most likely need pattern matching for my use case. Things
> like "keep the files named *.log" or "keep everything in foo/bar/
> recursively". For this to work we'll need to more or less duplicate
> what DirectoryScanner does but could be faster for all the constant
> file names by using
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > I'm sure I'm probably not understanding your change correctly, so
>> > I guess I need an explanations for how your change works.
>>
>> Basically, if I want to be able to keep so
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > I'm sure I'm probably not understanding your change correctly, so I
> > guess I need an explanations for how your change works.
>
> Basically, if I want to be able to keep some stuff in the target
> directory, I'll need a way to exclude them fro
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm worried about the performance of this change Stefan.
I understand that.
> I'm sure I'm probably not understanding your change correctly, so I
> guess I need an explanations for how your change works.
Basically, if I want to
I'm worried about the performance of this change Stefan. I'm sure I'm
probably not understanding your change correctly, so I guess I need an
explanations for how your change works.
As my inline comments below state, I'm concerned about the possible
slowdown on large syncs by using DirectoryScanner
13 matches
Mail list logo
