Re: Issue #4467 - blame youngest to oldest needs to handle SVN_INVALID_REVNUM - 1.9 blocker?

2015-02-20 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Branko Čibej wrote on Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 01:57:03 +0100: > On 18.02.2015 01:10, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > Julian Foad wrote on Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 16:26:54 +: > >> This issue looks like one that we should fix for 1.9. > >> > >> [[[ > >> Several of the blame functions don't work properly when

Re: Kidney blame's behaviour and edge cases

2015-02-20 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Julian Foad wrote on Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 20:15:29 +: > I (Julian Foad) wrote: > > issue #4565 "reverse blame, aka kidney blame" > > [...] I want to see: > > > >   * The first revision in which the line was changed (or deleted) after > > r140. > > The following help text explains how I t

Re: Time to branch 1.9

2015-02-20 Thread Julian Foad
I (Julian Foad) wrote: >>>  There are 19 defects currently tagged 1.9.0-consider. [...] None are left in 1.9-consider, but there are now many issues in '1.10-consider' :-) For the record... > #4467 "blame youngest to oldest needs to handle SVN_INVALID_REVNUM" That's fixed. > #4506 "reintegrat

Re: r1661179 - avoiding revision gaps when committing simple moves

2015-02-20 Thread Julian Foad
Bert proposed this for backport to 1.9.0. > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1661179 > Log: > Start using our move information in our commit processing to avoid > unneeded revision gaps when committing simple moves. > > This handles the simple case where (during commit) we know that a > node didn't ch

Re: Kidney blame's behaviour and edge cases

2015-02-20 Thread Julian Foad
Bert fixed the code to work like this, in r1661208. I committed help text, much like I pasted here, in r1661211. - Julian I (Julian Foad) wrote: > I (Julian Foad) wrote: >> issue #4565 "reverse blame, aka kidney blame" >> [...] I want to see: >> >>   * The first revision in which the line

Re: Kidney blame's behaviour and edge cases

2015-02-20 Thread Julian Foad
I (Julian Foad) wrote: > issue #4565 "reverse blame, aka kidney blame" > [...] I want to see: > >   * The first revision in which the line was changed (or deleted) after > r140. The following help text explains how I think it should behave: [[[ blame (praise, annotate, ann): Show when each

Re: Kidney blame's behaviour and edge cases

2015-02-20 Thread Julian Foad
I filed issue #4565 "reverse blame, aka kidney blame" to track this enhancement, because I think it is useful to have an issue to coordinate any change we make in a release. It currently doesn't behave how I think it should. Try   svn blame -r160:140 ^/subversion/trunk/subversion/svn/sv