Re: Building SVN 1.6.5

> + echo '*** Finished regression tests on RA_SVN (SVN method) layer ***' > + echo '*** Running regression tests on RA_DAV (HTTP method) layer ***' > + make davautocheck CLEANUP=true FS_TYPE=bdb > Adding password for user jrandom > Adding password for user jconstant > Syntax error on line 14 of /ro

Fwd: Building SVN 1.6.5

I am facing the following errors when building the SVN project. I was building SVN 1.6.5 + echo '*** Finished regression tests on RA_SVN (SVN method) layer ***' + echo '*** Running regression tests on RA_DAV (HTTP method) layer ***' + make davautocheck CLEANUP=true FS_TYPE=bdb Adding password for

Re: New website -- what do we lack?

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 05:23:43PM -0500, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > Has anyone besides Hyrum, Mark P. and myself taken a look at the new website > from a layout perspective? What stands between us and the day when we > remove that yellow banner and "commit to" this thing? Overall, it looks fine.

Re: svn commit: r901887 - in /subversion/site/publish: ./ dev/ docs/ docs/community-guide/ docs/release-notes/ security/ style/

Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > Isn't there some kind of "find my way back home" navigation thumbnail we > could include on these pages, though? I'm sure there is, but why? We don't have this in our C API docs or JavaHL docs. We don't have it in the various design notes and issue tracking issues and so

Re: svn commit: r901887 - in /subversion/site/publish: ./ dev/ docs/ docs/community-guide/ docs/release-notes/ security/ style/

Mark Phippard wrote: >> No. I don't think of (or want to think of) hack^H^H^H^HThe Subversion >> Community Guide as part of the website. It's a small book that's accessible >> from the website. Site-nav there would be visible and useful only at the >> top 2% of the page or something -- after tha

Re: Subversion in 2010 and Beyond

Stephen P Rufle wrote: > + 2^64 :) > > > Obliterate > > A new feature that cleanly removes obsolete files and other data from > > Subversion repositories. Obliterate will include comprehensive audit > > and recovery capabilities to guarantee that history is always > > available. I'm not quit

Re: Subversion 1.6.9 Released

- Original Message > From: Hyrum K. Wright > To: Subversion Dev > Sent: Thu, January 21, 2010 6:09:54 PM > Subject: Re: Subversion 1.6.9 Released > > The thought occurs to me (after-the-fact of course) about whether or not we > should have gone through some Incubator process to actual

Re: Subversion 1.6.9 Released

The thought occurs to me (after-the-fact of course) about whether or not we should have gone through some Incubator process to actually do the release. I think the answer is "no" since this isn't considered an Apache release, due to license and other issues. -Hyrum On Jan 21, 2010, at 4:56 PM,

Subversion 1.6.9 Released

I'm happy to announce Subversion 1.6.9, available from: http://subversion.tigris.org/downloads/subversion-1.6.9.tar.bz2 http://subversion.tigris.org/downloads/subversion-1.6.9.tar.gz http://subversion.tigris.org/downloads/subversion-1.6.9.zip http://subversion.tigris.org/downloads/

Re: svn commit: r901887 - in /subversion/site/publish: ./ dev/ docs/ docs/community-guide/ docs/release-notes/ security/ style/

On Jan 21, 2010, at 4:27 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > Mark Phippard wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 5:13 PM, wrote: >>> Author: cmpilato >>> Date: Thu Jan 21 22:13:44 2010 >>> New Revision: 901887 >>> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=901887&view=rev >>> Log: >>> Mmm... CSS media

Re: svn commit: r901887 - in /subversion/site/publish: ./ dev/ docs/ docs/community-guide/ docs/release-notes/ security/ style/

> No.  I don't think of (or want to think of) hack^H^H^H^HThe Subversion > Community Guide as part of the website.  It's a small book that's accessible > from the website.  Site-nav there would be visible and useful only at the > top 2% of the page or something -- after that it's out of view and a

Re: svn commit: r901887 - in /subversion/site/publish: ./ dev/ docs/ docs/community-guide/ docs/release-notes/ security/ style/

Mark Phippard wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 5:13 PM, wrote: >> Author: cmpilato >> Date: Thu Jan 21 22:13:44 2010 >> New Revision: 901887 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=901887&view=rev >> Log: >> Mmm... CSS media support... >> >> * site/publish/style/site.css >> Add media-specif

New website -- what do we lack?

Has anyone besides Hyrum, Mark P. and myself taken a look at the new website from a layout perspective? What stands between us and the day when we remove that yellow banner and "commit to" this thing? * There is still some content unfinished. The "Getting Involved" page, for example. * The

Re: svn commit: r901887 - in /subversion/site/publish: ./ dev/ docs/ docs/community-guide/ docs/release-notes/ security/ style/

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 5:13 PM, wrote: > Author: cmpilato > Date: Thu Jan 21 22:13:44 2010 > New Revision: 901887 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=901887&view=rev > Log: > Mmm... CSS media support... > > * site/publish/style/site.css > Add media-specific style blocks (so we can avoid

Re: Subversion in 2010 and Beyond

+ 2^64 :) > Obliterate > A new feature that cleanly removes obsolete files and other data from > Subversion repositories. Obliterate will include comprehensive audit > and recovery capabilities to guarantee that history is always > available.

Re: svn commit: r901778 - /subversion/trunk/build.conf

[Stefan Sperling] > I'll do a build now with r901778 reverted to check. Note that one test is not conclusive. I mean, it could well be a platform-specific build issue. Even though we have two layers (gen_make, libtool) trying to shield us from platform-specific build issues. Peter

Re: Updating my email address in COMMITTERS file in releases

Dan Poirier wrote: > Just a thought - maybe switch to a longer-lived email address, even if > it's just a forwarding alias? Looks good on paper, but in my experience, companies that pay salaries of folks to work on open source software want all the attribution they can get. The company domain nam

Re: Updating my email address in COMMITTERS file in releases

[Stefan Sperling] > --- dist.sh (revision 900955) > +++ dist.sh (working copy) > @@ -228,6 +228,10 @@ > > rm -f "$DISTPATH/STATUS" > > +# Get COMMITTERS from trunk so email addresses are current. > +${SVN:-svn} cat > "http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/COMMITTERS"; \ > + >

Re: Updating my email address in COMMITTERS file in releases

Just a thought - maybe switch to a longer-lived email address, even if it's just a forwarding alias?

Re: svn commit: r901778 - /subversion/trunk/build.conf

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 08:59:03PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: > I'll do a build now with r901778 reverted to check. Builds fine here with r901778 reverted. Stefan

Re: 1.6.9 tarballs up for testing/signing

On Wed, 2010-01-20, Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > 1.6.9 is up, the magic revision is r901367: Summary: +1 to release (Unix). Paranoia: Verified that all 6 distribution packages match their md5sums, sha1sums and to-tigris copies. Verified that *.bz2 vs *.gz uncompress to exactly the same tar

Re: svn commit: r901778 - /subversion/trunk/build.conf

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 07:48:55PM +, Julian Foad wrote: > Stefan Sperling wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 06:47:40PM +, Philip Martin wrote: > > > I suppose it could be a variation of the "libtool linking against > > > installed libraries" problem. Do you have an a pre-r899829 version

Re: Updating my email address in COMMITTERS file in releases

On Jan 21, 2010, at 1:54 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 01:44:19PM -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote: >> >> On Jan 21, 2010, at 1:42 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 07:06:07PM +, Julian Foad wrote: In light of that, do you think it would be be

Re: Updating my email address in COMMITTERS file in releases

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 01:44:19PM -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > > On Jan 21, 2010, at 1:42 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 07:06:07PM +, Julian Foad wrote: > >> In light of that, do you think it would be better to ship > >> the current (trunk) version of that file

Re: svn commit: r901778 - /subversion/trunk/build.conf

Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 06:47:40PM +, Philip Martin wrote: > > I suppose it could be a variation of the "libtool linking against > > installed libraries" problem. Do you have an a pre-r899829 version of > > Subversion installed in prefix? If so do you still get the pr

Re: svn commit: r901797 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra_neon: options.c props.c ra_neon.h util.c

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 05:40:50PM -, julianf...@apache.org wrote: > Author: julianfoad > Date: Thu Jan 21 17:40:50 2010 > New Revision: 901797 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=901797&view=rev > Log: > Ensure the URLs in libsvn_ra_neon are always canonical. > Found by: stsp > Sugges

Re: Updating my email address in COMMITTERS file in releases

On Jan 21, 2010, at 1:42 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 07:06:07PM +, Julian Foad wrote: >> In light of that, do you think it would be better to ship >> the current (trunk) version of that file each time we make a release? > > If Hyrum can do this without major hassle,

Re: Updating my email address in COMMITTERS file in releases

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 07:06:07PM +, Julian Foad wrote: > In light of that, do you think it would be better to ship > the current (trunk) version of that file each time we make a release? If Hyrum can do this without major hassle, +1. Stefan

Re: svn commit: r901778 - /subversion/trunk/build.conf

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 06:47:40PM +, Philip Martin wrote: > I suppose it could be a variation of the "libtool linking against > installed libraries" problem. Do you have an a pre-r899829 version of > Subversion installed in prefix? If so do you still get the problem > when you revert r901778

Updating my email address in COMMITTERS file in releases

I would like to update my email address in the COMMITTERS file in the 1.6.x and 1.5.x branches. Either a colleague of mine or a customer noticed that the COMMITTERS file in release branches contains out-of-date email addresses. For example, my address given in

Re: svn commit: r901778 - /subversion/trunk/build.conf

Julian Foad writes: > Peter Samuelson wrote: >> [julianf...@apache.org] >> > Add missing library dependencies in 'build.conf', following some recent >> > change that made some more libsvn_client functions depend on libsvn_wc. >> > (The error was, "undefined reference to `svn_wc__node_is_status_de

Re: svn commit: r901778 - /subversion/trunk/build.conf

Peter Samuelson wrote: > [julianf...@apache.org] > > Add missing library dependencies in 'build.conf', following some recent > > change that made some more libsvn_client functions depend on libsvn_wc. > > (The error was, "undefined reference to `svn_wc__node_is_status_deleted'".) > > Huh. This lo

Re: [PATCH] Fix failing ci caused in r40202

Kannan wrote: > [[[ > Log: > Ensure the URLs in libsvn_ra_neon are always canonical. [...] > ]]] Thanks. I found one more problem when I tried to compile it: subversion/libsvn_ra_neon/options.c:110: error: implicit declaration of function ‘svn_uri_canonicalize’ I fixed this, by #including "svn_d

Re: svn commit: r901778 - /subversion/trunk/build.conf

[julianf...@apache.org] > Add missing library dependencies in 'build.conf', following some recent > change that made some more libsvn_client functions depend on libsvn_wc. > (The error was, "undefined reference to `svn_wc__node_is_status_deleted'".) Huh. This looks like a workaround to me, not a

Re: 1.6.9 tarballs up for testing/signing

C. Michael Pilato wrote: > Hyrum K. Wright wrote: >> 1.6.9 is up, the magic revision is r901367: >> >> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.9/ >> >> Download, test, sign and send your sigs back to me. (And don't even >> think about declaring this as "released" until I say so, for reasons I >> wo

Re: 1.6.9 tarballs up for testing/signing

Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > 1.6.9 is up, the magic revision is r901367: > > http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.9/ Summary: +1 to release. Platform: Ubuntu 9.04 (jaunty) Linux. Tested: 1.6.9 tarball with local dependencies (not from deps tarball) ((neon,serf,local,svn) x fsfs) +

Re: [PATCH]: Allow 'svn log' on an uncommitted copy destination

One IRC: is it me or is it apache.org: pburba's mail "[PATCH]: Allow 'svn log' on an uncommitted copy destination" has no patch attached. (I know it's a moot point now, he already committed the patch.) peterS: Hmm, I see a patch peterS: Oh, that attachment is a *.diff, rather than *.diff.txt p

Re: 1.6.9 tarballs up for testing/signing

Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > 1.6.9 is up, the magic revision is r901367: > > http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.9/ > > Download, test, sign and send your sigs back to me. (And don't even > think about declaring this as "released" until I say so, for reasons I > won't expound upon here.) On Ubun

Re: 1.6.9 tarballs up for testing/signing

> Signature: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (Darwin) > > iEYEABECAAYFAktYeFQACgkQjV0eBk3xi+IWWgCaAyehHayYa3kVPvWX/3zCsSwQ > IT0AoKeWsubD0RFGyxAwX7uE9tzcgCqD > =uQCh > -END PGP SIGNATURE- I forgot to mention that I signed the subversion-1.6.9.tar.gz file. Jer

Re: 1.6.9 tarballs up for testing/signing

> 1.6.9 is up, the magic revision is r901367: > > http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.9/ > > Download, test, sign and send your sigs back to me. (And don't even think > about declaring this as "released" until I say so, for reasons I won't > expound upon here.) Results: +1 to release Sig

Re: [PATCH]: Allow 'svn log' on an uncommitted copy destination

Paul Burba wrote: > Added a test and committed r901752. Nice fix. I wonder if the same problem still exists in any other commands. I think "cat" and "blame" have been fixed in the 1.5.x/1.6.x time frame. Just in case anyone fancies checking :-) - Julian

Re: [PATCH]: Allow 'svn log' on an uncommitted copy destination

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Paul Burba wrote: > Any reason why we shouldn't be able to run 'svn log' on an uncommitted copy? > > For example (this is with tr...@901239): > > ### A WC with no local changes: > >  >svn st > > ### Check the log of a file: > >  >svn log A\D\H\psi >  --

Re: 1.6.9 tarballs up for testing/signing

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > 1.6.9 is up, the magic revision is r901367: > > http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.9/ > > Download, test, sign and send your sigs back to me.  (And don't even think > about declaring this as "released" until I say so, for reasons I won

Re: Plan for 1.6.9

On Wed, 2010-01-20, I (Julian Foad) wrote: > Basically I am questioning whether r900797 should be seen as a > requirement for 1.6.9. Certainly it would be good to include this > additional fix if it's stable. Ah, great, I see so it's been approved and included in the 1.6.9 testing package, so this

Re: Subversion in 2010 and Beyond

FYI, that "Subversion in 2010 and Beyond" was a Webinar talking about some of the things coming up in Subversion 1.7 and beyond. It was produced by my employer WANdisco who also sent this summary and link to it. We broadcast it live on Tuesday this week, the four of us doing our technical bits foll

Re: [PATCH] Fix failing ci caused in r40202

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Julian Foad wrote: [..] > In the second place it is used, we know it holds a URL: > >> case ELEM_href: >> /* Special handling for that belongs to the tag. */ >> if (rsrc->href_parent == ELEM_response) >> return assign_rsrc_url(pc

Re: [PATCH] Fix failing ci caused in r40202

On Thu, 2010-01-07, Kannan wrote: > Tracing these back further, the value gets set in `end_element()'. This > fixes one more instance of non-canonical URL in `get_version_url()', > thus fixing all instances of non-canonical URLs AFAICS. Thank you for > the feedback, Julian. Attaching the updated pa

Re: [PATCH] Make svn clients indicate their operation name to backend(right now only to DAV)

On Wed, 2010-01-06, Kamesh Jayachandran wrote: > This patch is with respect to the original thread > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion-dev/201001.mbox/browser For archaeological purposes (as that link goes to a whole month of mail), the original thread may have been this one:

Re: Plan for 1.6.9

Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > 1.6.8 is a dud, and will never see the light of day. Thankfully, we > found the problems with ra_serf and the deps during the testing, and > appropriate fixes have been nominated. > > My plan is to reroll 1.6.9, but holding the roll until r900797 (a > high-impact bug fix)

Re: 1.6.9 tarballs up for testing/signing

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > 1.6.9 is up, the magic revision is r901367: > > http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.9/ Summary: +1 to release (Unix) Tested: 1.6.9 tarball with local dependencies (nothing from deps tarball) [ra_local, ra_svn,

RE: 1.6.9 tarballs up for testing/signing

> -Original Message- > From: Hyrum K. Wright [mailto:hyrum_wri...@mail.utexas.edu] > Sent: woensdag 20 januari 2010 23:03 > To: Subversion Dev > Subject: 1.6.9 tarballs up for testing/signing > > 1.6.9 is up, the magic revision is r901367: > > http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.9/ >