I was originally going to obvious-fix this, but then it got a bit bigger
than I expected, so I thought I'd run this by you.
[[[
* publish/faq.html,
* publish/index.html,
* publish/mailing-lists.html,
* publish/news.html: Fix XHTML well-formedness and validity errors.
]]]
Roman.Index: publish/f
On 09/28/2012 04:39 PM, Bert Huijben wrote:
> How does this affect master-slave setups?
>
> Do we need a setting to disable the advertising on slaves to avoid
> sending them to the master as part of a commit like we added for HTTPv2?
Ugh. Good catch. Yeah, I suppose we need *something* here. I
> -Original Message-
> From: cmpil...@apache.org [mailto:cmpil...@apache.org]
> Sent: vrijdag 28 september 2012 22:26
> To: comm...@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: svn commit: r1391638 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion: include/
> libsvn_ra_local/ libsvn_ra_serf/ libsvn_repos/ mod_dav_sv
...and proposed for backport to 1.7.7.
On 09/28/2012 04:35 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Looks good. Committed in r1391641.
>
> On 09/28/2012 02:44 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>> Index: libsvn_subr/cache-memcache.c
>> ===
>> --- libsvn
Looks good. Committed in r1391641.
On 09/28/2012 02:44 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Index: libsvn_subr/cache-memcache.c
> ===
> --- libsvn_subr/cache-memcache.c (revision 1391584)
> +++ libsvn_subr/cache-memcache.c (working co
Index: libsvn_subr/cache-memcache.c
===
--- libsvn_subr/cache-memcache.c(revision 1391584)
+++ libsvn_subr/cache-memcache.c(working copy)
@@ -470,7 +470,8 @@
0, /* min connection
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 9:10 PM, wrote:
> The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder svn-x64-ubuntu-gcc while
> building ASF Buildbot.
> Full details are available at:
> http://ci.apache.org/builders/svn-x64-ubuntu-gcc/builds/6234
>
> Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
>
> Buildslave f
On 09/28/2012 10:52 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> Apparently, this has been fixed for 1.7. The reporter doesn't say which
> version they're using.
Xlnt.
--
C. Michael Pilato
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Enterprise Cloud Development
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Apparently, this has been fixed for 1.7. The reporter doesn't say which
version they're using.
~/w$ ll
total 8
-rw-r--r-- 1 brane staff 86 Sep 28 16:47 foo
~/w$ cat foo
$Revision: 3 $
$Author: brane $
$Date: 2012-09-28 16:47:15 +0200 (Fri, 28 Sep 2012) $
~/w$ svn cp foo bar
A bar
~/w$
Despite the protocol failure by the reporter, I do think there's a bit of UI
#fail here. Subversion users shouldn't be expected to know that "-1" is
secret code for "invalid revision". Our keyword expansion code should just
show a empty revision there instead. I'm guessing we show -1 in 'svn
sta
Actually, I think there's a bit of UI #fail here. Subversion users
shouldn't be expected to know that "-1" is secret code for "invalid
revision". Our keyword expansion code should just show a empty revision
there instead. I'm guessing we show -1 in 'svn status' and 'svn info'
output too. Let's
On 28.09.2012 12:27, SENTHIL C wrote:
> Hi Support,
This is not a Subversion support mailing list. Your question more
properly belongs on us...@subversion.apache.org.
-- Brane
P.S.: Revision, Author and Date are not defined until you commit a file
to the repository.
> I can see that Revision s
12 matches
Mail list logo
