On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 01:35, Philipp Marek wrote:
> Hello Greg,
> Hello Jan,
>
> On Donnerstag, 1. April 2010, Greg Stein wrote:
>> 2010/3/31 Jan Horák :
>> > 30.3.2010 13:55, Philipp Marek wrote:
>> >...
>> >
>> >> * Furthermore, how about allowing the plain data to reside in files?
>> >> Wo
Fixed in r930175.
grrr..
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 01:20, Greg Stein wrote:
> This breaks: lock_tests 10, and switch_tests 17.
>
> Investigating...
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 18:09, wrote:
>> Author: gstein
>> Date: Thu Apr 1 22:09:09 2010
>> New Revision: 930111
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache
Hello Greg,
Hello Jan,
On Donnerstag, 1. April 2010, Greg Stein wrote:
> 2010/3/31 Jan Horák :
> > 30.3.2010 13:55, Philipp Marek wrote:
> >...
> >
> >> * Furthermore, how about allowing the plain data to reside in files?
> >>Would make the database much smaller, and then these data blocks
>
This breaks: lock_tests 10, and switch_tests 17.
Investigating...
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 18:09, wrote:
> Author: gstein
> Date: Thu Apr 1 22:09:09 2010
> New Revision: 930111
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=930111&view=rev
> Log:
> Fix a leaking temporary file in the update editor, i
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Philip Martin writes:
>
>> Paul Burba writes:
>>
My bad, I didn't pass --url! I was still half asleep when I did that.
The tests pass for me over ra_neon, but all except 77 fail over
ra_serf.
>>>
>>> All 5 corresponding test
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 15:48, Jon Trowbridge wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> That doesn't make WebDAV a bad protocol, but it might make this *specific*
>> use of WebDAV a sub-optimal choice for the specific server platform.
>
> Given the large number of round-tri
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name]
> Sent: donderdag 1 april 2010 21:49
> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: IRC build failure notifications
>
> The ASF-hosted buildbot can report on IRC (to a channel or in privmsg)
> the
> status of builds.
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> That doesn't make WebDAV a bad protocol, but it might make this *specific*
> use of WebDAV a sub-optimal choice for the specific server platform.
Given the large number of round-trips required to do anything, I'm
perfectly comfortable callin
The ASF-hosted buildbot can report on IRC (to a channel or in privmsg) the
status of builds. There was disagreement today on #svn-dev whether it's
desired. What do people think of having the bot notify on IRC
(a) after every failed build?
(b) on the first failed build after a series of success
On 01.04.2010 21:30, Greg Stein wrote:
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 15:12, Jon Trowbridge wrote:
...
WebDAV introduces a huge amount of complexity, but as far as I can
tell it buys svn essentially nothing. The design of the protocol
We are able to mount svn repositories on desktops/tools/whatever
Hi Jan,
Seems simple, but... if you avoid the use of plurals, the table names will
be shorter.
-Geoff
-Original Message-
From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 3:02 PM
To: Jan Horák
Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: SQL backend database scheme
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 15:12, Jon Trowbridge wrote:
>...
> WebDAV introduces a huge amount of complexity, but as far as I can
> tell it buys svn essentially nothing. The design of the protocol
We are able to mount svn repositories on desktops/tools/whatever via
WebDAV. And when auto-versioning i
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 31.03.2010 21:20, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> - "WebDAV sucks. Period."
>> ...
>
> Out of curiosity: what's the relation to writing a Subversion FS backend?
It added a lot of friction to the development process.
Because of s
Hey Jan,
A couple small nits:
* maybe use "txn_id" rather than "txt_id". the latter sounds like
"text" rather than "transaction", and "txn" is used in the APIs
* transactions_proplist has a txnprop_id which is never referenced.
I'd suggest making the primary key.
Cheers,
-g
2010/3/29 Jan Horá
2010/3/31 Jan Horák :
> 30.3.2010 13:55, Philipp Marek wrote:
>...
>> * Furthermore, how about allowing the plain data to reside in files?
>> Would make the database much smaller, and then these data blocks
>> could possibly be shared among multiple repositories.
>> (Really easy, too, if
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 09:23, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 08:52 -0400, Paul Burba wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Julian Foad
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 11:43 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
>> >>> On Wed, 20
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 08:17, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 31.03.2010 21:20, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> - "WebDAV sucks. Period."
>> ...
>
> Out of curiosity: what's the relation to writing a Subversion FS backend?
It isn't really WebDAV, but more about HTTP, and it being a stateless
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Joe Swatosh wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Hyrum K. Wright <
> > hyrum_wri...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> 1.6.10 tarballs are up, the magic revision is r929659:
> >>
> >> http://orac.ec
Philip Martin writes:
> Paul Burba writes:
>
>>> My bad, I didn't pass --url! I was still half asleep when I did that.
>>> The tests pass for me over ra_neon, but all except 77 fail over
>>> ra_serf.
>>
>> All 5 corresponding tests (45, 76, 78, 123, 125 for those playing at
>> home) pass on tr
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 08:52 -0400, Paul Burba wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Julian Foad
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 11:43 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
>> >>> On Wed,
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 08:52 -0400, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Julian Foad
> > wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 11:43 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 13:01 -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> >>> > 1
Paul Burba writes:
>> My bad, I didn't pass --url! I was still half asleep when I did that.
>> The tests pass for me over ra_neon, but all except 77 fail over
>> ra_serf.
>
> All 5 corresponding tests (45, 76, 78, 123, 125 for those playing at
> home) pass on trunk [fsfs | ra_serf]
Agreed. I g
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 11:43 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 13:01 -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> 1.6.10 tarba
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:20:37 -0400
"C. Michael Pilato" wrote:
> For me, the biggest lessons to be learned here
> touch on over-engineering and under-testing.
As a mere user, who has tried to figure out where the bugs that
bit him are coming from (ie as someone who actually tried to
debug svn),
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 11:43 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 13:01 -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>>> > 1.6.10 tarballs are up, the magic revision is r929659:
>>> >
>>> > ht
On 31.03.2010 21:20, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
...
- "WebDAV sucks. Period."
...
Out of curiosity: what's the relation to writing a Subversion FS backend?
Best regards, Julian
PS: and, of course, it's not true :-)
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 11:43 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
>> On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 13:01 -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>> > 1.6.10 tarballs are up, the magic revision is r929659:
>> >
>> > http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.10/
>>
>> For me, mer
Julian Foad writes:
> On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 13:01 -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>> 1.6.10 tarballs are up, the magic revision is r929659:
>>
>> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.10/
>
> For me, merge_tests.py 45 77 79 124 126 all fail, on serf/fsfs. Here's
> the command and the end of the
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 11:43 +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 13:01 -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> > 1.6.10 tarballs are up, the magic revision is r929659:
> >
> > http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.10/
>
> For me, merge_tests.py 45 77 79 124 126 all fail, on serf/fsfs.
If I
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 11:17 +0100, Philip Martin wrote:
> Julian Foad writes:
>
> > On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 13:01 -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> >> 1.6.10 tarballs are up, the magic revision is r929659:
> >>
> >> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.10/
> >
> > For me, the new test 'svnadmin_te
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 13:01 -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> 1.6.10 tarballs are up, the magic revision is r929659:
>
> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.10/
For me, merge_tests.py 45 77 79 124 126 all fail, on serf/fsfs. Here's
the command and the end of the 'tests.log' output for test 45:
Julian Foad writes:
> On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 13:01 -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>> 1.6.10 tarballs are up, the magic revision is r929659:
>>
>> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.10/
>
> For me, the new test 'svnadmin_tests.py 19' fails on BDB (but passes on
> FSFS). Is this known?
That te
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 13:01 -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> 1.6.10 tarballs are up, the magic revision is r929659:
>
> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.10/
For me, the new test 'svnadmin_tests.py 19' fails on BDB (but passes on
FSFS). Is this known?
[[[
$ subversion/tests/cmdline/svnadmi
33 matches
Mail list logo
