Just noting that I have more tweaks in the pipeline which are more
elaborate, time consuming and debatable. So I'm not updating other locations
yet. (like s.a.o/docs/svnmerge.txt)
~Neels
On 11/30/2011 11:18 PM, ne...@apache.org wrote:
Author: neels
Date: Wed Nov 30 22:18:45 2011
New Revision:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: hwri...@apache.org [mailto:hwri...@apache.org]
>> Sent: woensdag 23 november 2011 5:54
>> To: comm...@subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: svn commit: r1205287 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Andy Singleton wrote:
> Here is a patch to update the Binary Package page with links to client
> packages. This will make it easier for users to upgrade to 1.7.
>
> This patch is an update to
> http://subversion.apache.org/packages.html
>
> This patch keeps the li
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 3:19 PM, rupert.thurner
wrote:
> i noticed now with svn-1.7.1 a behaviour which i never noticed before,
> but i am unsure if i just did not fall over it, or it was not there. a
> "svn commit" does not seem to update the version of '.' even if it is
> invalidated. so one mus
i noticed now with svn-1.7.1 a behaviour which i never noticed before,
but i am unsure if i just did not fall over it, or it was not there. a
"svn commit" does not seem to update the version of '.' even if it is
invalidated. so one must do a "svn up" after the commit, without
anybody else interming
On 11/30/2011 02:24 PM, Andy Singleton wrote:
> Here is a patch to update the Binary Package page with links to client
> packages. This will make it easier for users to upgrade to 1.7.
Andy, your patch didn't survive the transfer. (The basic gist is there, but
the patch format is mangled.)
--
Here is a patch to update the Binary Package page with links to client
packages. This will make it easier for users to upgrade to 1.7.
This patch is an update to
http://subversion.apache.org/packages.html
This patch keeps the links in alphabetical order.
BASIC FEATURES
* No registration is r
On 11/30/2011 10:08 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> I guess this is the part where I'm confused. You can't "delay" an
>> open_directory() call -- it must execute, it must return, and when it
>> returns it must provide a new directory baton or throw an error.
>
> Actually, such calls can be delayed.
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 8:12 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 11/30/2011 12:59 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> Let me offer a concrete example, in the hopes that I can make some
>> sense. I use the term "sender" to mean "the thing that is invoking
>> the editor callbacks" and "receiver" to mean "th
Summary:
+1 to release
Platform:
Linux (Debian/squeeze)
Tested:
(local, svn, svn+sasl, serf, neon) x (fsfs, fsfs/pack/shard, bdb)
(serf/v1, neon/v1) x (fsfs, bdb)
swig-pl, swig-py, swig-rb
javahl x (fsfs, bdb)
Results:
All tests PASS
Local dependencies:
apache2-threaded-dev
On 11/30/2011 12:59 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> Let me offer a concrete example, in the hopes that I can make some
> sense. I use the term "sender" to mean "the thing that is invoking
> the editor callbacks" and "receiver" to mean "the thing who is
> providing callbacks to be invoked". I believe
11 matches
Mail list logo
