Re: Subversion 1.9.0-dev FSFS performance tests

2014-06-21 Thread Branko Čibej
On 21.06.2014 17:18, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 20.06.2014 11:22, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> On 19 June 2014 17:06, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: >>> Turn out that the ruby repo is something special >>> in that it has very deep histories of relatively few, >>> very small files combined with one huge changelog >

1.9 API review

2014-06-21 Thread Branko Čibej
I've started a page on the Wiki for the pre-release API review. I guess I'm jumping the gun just a bit, but a couple days ago I noticed some missing bits in the docstrings of two functions, and though it better to just put this in the wiki instead of risking losing the thread on dev@. https://wiki

Re: Subversion 1.9.0-dev FSFS performance tests

2014-06-21 Thread Branko Čibej
On 20.06.2014 11:22, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > On 19 June 2014 17:06, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: >> Turn out that the ruby repo is something special >> in that it has very deep histories of relatively few, >> very small files combined with one huge changelog >> file (the latter taking up ~75% of the repo).

Re: AW: [Patch] Fix for Issue #4395: 'svn upgrade' loses 1.6-client format files

2014-06-21 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Daniel Shahaf wrote on Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 13:34:23 +: > Perhaps I shouldn't rely on metadata fields for anything important. Sorry, didn't mean to sound accusing. I was just thinking aloud about what might have been a better way to present the information in the bug report. Daniel > Someti

Re: [PATCH] On the 'ra-git' branch: update to libgit2 v0.21

2014-06-21 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Carlos Martín Nieto wrote on Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 17:06:53 +0200: > Hi, > > libgit2 v0.21.0 was just released, and there have been some changes to the > API. > Thanks! Seeing as the patch breaks compatibility with older libgit's, shouldn't INSTALL, BRANCH-README, and/or configure.ac be updated

Re: AW: [Patch] Fix for Issue #4395: 'svn upgrade' loses 1.6-client format files

2014-06-21 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Julian Foad wrote on Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 16:39:21 +0100: > Markus Schaber wrote: > > > Second iteration of my patch for fixing issue #4395. > > http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4395 > > The issue report is unclear. What are the 'from' and 'to' versions > meant to be? Is the re

Re: Improving svn commit progress notification

2014-06-21 Thread Ivan Zhakov
On 20 June 2014 18:38, Julian Foad wrote: > > Ivan Zhakov wrote: > >> [[[ > >> $ svn ci wc -m "log msg" > >> Sendingwc\foo > >> Transmitting file data done > >> Committing transaction... > >> Committed revision 5. > >> ]]] > >> > >> Also consider the out-of-date case: > > > > C