Re: svn commit: r1417639 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/mod_dav_svn: dav_svn.h mod_dav_svn.c reports/update.c

2012-12-05 Thread Lieven Govaerts
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Mark Phippard wrote: > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 3:46 PM, wrote: >> Author: lgo >> Date: Wed Dec 5 20:46:33 2012 >> New Revision: 1417639 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1417639&view=rev >> Log: >> Add a Force option to SVNAllowBulkUpdates. This allows a

Re: non-skelta update editor mode in ra_serf (was Re: svn commit: r1415864 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra_serf/update.c)

2012-12-05 Thread Lieven Govaerts
Hi, On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 10:18 PM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > [ changing subject to make topic more visible] > > On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Mark Phippard wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Justin Erenkrantz >> wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 4:54 PM, wrote: Author: cmpila

Re: svn commit: r1417639 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/mod_dav_svn: dav_svn.h mod_dav_svn.c reports/update.c

2012-12-05 Thread Mark Phippard
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 3:46 PM, wrote: > Author: lgo > Date: Wed Dec 5 20:46:33 2012 > New Revision: 1417639 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1417639&view=rev > Log: > Add a Force option to SVNAllowBulkUpdates. This allows a server admin to > always > respond to an update-report reques

Re: Outreach Program for Women

2012-12-05 Thread Lisa L
Hello all, Please excuse my delay in replying. I found a mentor with OTI and started a project right after contacting this list, and as time was running short, I was wracking my brain on crunch time until the deadline. Then after my application was properly submitted, I thought I might try some

svnserve and --config-file

2012-12-05 Thread Ben Reser
Our documentation for svnserve --config-file says [[[ --config-file=filename When specified, svnserve reads filename once at program startup and caches the svnserve configuration and any passwords and authorization configura- tion referenced from filen

Re: trunk 'svn merge' takes a very long time to respond.

2012-12-05 Thread Paul Burba
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Paul Burba wrote: >> >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Paul Burba wrote: >> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Paul Burba wrote: >> >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Philip Martin >> >> wrote: >> >>> M

Re: RFC: simple proposal for Internet-scoped IDs

2012-12-05 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Eric S. Raymond wrote on Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 10:46:28 -0500: > Peter Samuelson : > > In fact, I'm having trouble coming up with a scenario in which identity > > / contact information is interesting enough to want to publish via the > > repository, yet not interesting enough to want to know before

Re: RFC: simple proposal for Internet-scoped IDs

2012-12-05 Thread Eric S. Raymond
Peter Samuelson : > In fact, I'm having trouble coming up with a scenario in which identity > / contact information is interesting enough to want to publish via the > repository, yet not interesting enough to want to know before giving > someone commit access. Those aren't necessarily the *same* p

Re: RFC: simple proposal for Internet-scoped IDs

2012-12-05 Thread Peter Samuelson
> Eric S. Raymond wrote on Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 19:54:17 -0500: > > O(1) cost vs. O(n) cost, where n is the number of repos. Q.E.D. [Daniel Shahaf] > No, O(n) cost <=> O(m) cost, where M is Ω(the number of homedirs). And also, the O(n) is piggybacked on top of another cost that is _already_ O(n

Re: Combine and rename WC APIs that check WC root and switched

2012-12-05 Thread Julian Foad
Bert Huijben wrote: > Julian Foad wrote: >>   1) svn_wc_check_root(*is_wcroot,*is_switched,*kind,...) >>   3) svn_wc__db_is_switched(*is_wcroot,*is_switched,*kind,...) >> >>  Would it work to call (1) and (3) 'svn_wc...check_root_and_switched'? >> >>  It's a bit long but more accurate. > > I don

Re: Combine and rename WC APIs that check WC root and switched

2012-12-05 Thread Branko Čibej
On 05.12.2012 13:28, Bert Huijben wrote: > PS. If we want to crash the compilers and break the 80 character > linewidth we can also rename svn_wc__db_read_read info to show all its > arguments in its name ;-) You'd certainly not crash compilers that way. After all, C++ name mangling is exactly th

RE: Combine and rename WC APIs that check WC root and switched

2012-12-05 Thread Bert Huijben
> -Original Message- > From: Julian Foad [mailto:julianf...@btopenworld.com] > Sent: woensdag 5 december 2012 02:45 > To: Bert Huijben > Cc: Subversion Development > Subject: Re: Combine and rename WC APIs that check WC root and switched > > I (Julian Foad) wrote: > > > Bert Huijben wro

Re: AW: RFC: simple proposal for Internet-scoped IDs

2012-12-05 Thread Branko Čibej
On 05.12.2012 11:44, Markus Schaber wrote: > And I don't think that People like Linus Thorvalds will rebase the > Linux kernel when ... All the Internet-scoped IDs in the world, unique or not, won't help people tell the difference between Thorvalds and Torvalds. :) -- Brane -- Branko Čibej Dir

Re: RFC: simple proposal for Internet-scoped IDs

2012-12-05 Thread Eric S. Raymond
Johan Corveleyn : > Just to be clear, this entire proposal / discussion is about a feature > that only makes sense for public repositories, forges, open source > projects, etc, ... right? That's the use case in mind, but see below. >AFAIU, there is no need for something like >

AW: RFC: simple proposal for Internet-scoped IDs

2012-12-05 Thread Markus Schaber
Hi, Eric, Von: Eric S. Raymond [mailto:e...@thyrsus.com] > > As the author of reposurgeon - which can edit old commits in multiple > VCSes - I've probably heard more about the use cases for this ability than > anyone else. Patching committers' past email addresses is not one of them, > though I h

Re: RFC: simple proposal for Internet-scoped IDs

2012-12-05 Thread Johan Corveleyn
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Ben Reser : ... >> 3) You keep assuming that email addresses are immutably owned by >> someone. That is fundamentally not true for the vast majority of >> people and frankly is never absolutely not true. > > So? Does this make it any les