On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> On 18 September 2015 at 15:06, wrote:
>> I created accounts ‘sussman’ and ‘pburba’ on Jira and e-mailed Ben and Paul
>> about them.
>>
> I've added user mapping for 'sussman' and 'pburba' to migration
> script, even though I'm not sure that
rINcc7nbj8+2r3bzNVWQLI5dCNhLIHItNYF/584voqyMe
l3WCnqnw+A6Y0HDjhk+yZfiMxw6DQxDKGVSlTpozbiGvVgtd+HFlLla2gvYLWC79
tli2xlL1u7wDPytZ5VXM
=sqLd
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
>> On 4/21/15 1:09 P
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> On 4/21/15 1:09 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
>> The 1.9.0-rc1 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
>> Please get the tarballs from
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
>> and add your signatures there.
>>
>> This bein
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:30 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.8.11 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on December 15th so
> please try a
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.7.19 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on December 15th so
> please try a
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.7.18 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on August 11th so
> please try and
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.8.10 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on August 11th so
> please try and
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> On 8/1/14 6:33 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
>> The 1.8.10 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
>> Please get the tarballs from
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
>> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.7.17 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on May 7th so please
> try and ge
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> On 4/30/14, 11:00 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
>> The 1.7.17 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
>> Please get the tarballs from
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
>> and add your signatures there. I plan to try
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.8.5 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on November
> 25th so please try a
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> ...
>> checkout_tests.py 14: 'checkout from the root of a Windows drive'
>> fails for all permutations tested. In his test results Johan
>> mentioned
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.7.14 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on November
> 25th so please try
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.8.4 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on October
> 29th so please try an
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.8.3 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on August
> 29th so please try and
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.7.13 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on August
> 29th so please try an
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.7.11 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on July
> 23rd so please try and
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:28 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.8.1 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on July
> 23rd so please try and g
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Stefan Küng
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Another one from the crash reports:
>> >
>&
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Stefan Küng wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Another one from the crash reports:
>
> in libsvn_client\log.c, line 715, function run_ra_get_log():
>
> matching_segment = bsearch(&younger_rev, log_segments->elts,
>log_segments->nelts, log_segments->elt_si
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Ruben Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The Wiki (Linked via 1.8 release notes) documents the syntax of
> svn:global-ignores as being "A whitespace-delimited collection of file
> patterns". I just tried this out and had no success. However, using newline
> as delimiter works
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Lieven Govaerts wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:22 PM,
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Lieven Govaerts wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>>>> I updated my Windows laptop t
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Lieven Govaerts wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>>> I updated my Windows laptop to 1.8.0 final. I am trying to commit a
>>> change for Subclipse to tigris.org and it is faili
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 6:00 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> At the risk of jinxing the proposed June 18th release date for 1.8.0,
> I'm posting the proposed tarballs for signing and testing:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
>
> These are cut from the same magic rev as 1.8.0-rc3, meani
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:16 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
>> I really don't understand why this change is necessary at all since as
>> you can see above the source tree is added to the load path with -I.
Sorry Ben, I missed your first email on this unti
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
>> Here it is: the second Release Candidate for Subversion 1.8.0. You can
>> fetch the proposed tarballs from here:
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
&
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> Here it is: the second Release Candidate for Subversion 1.8.0. You can
> fetch the proposed tarballs from here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
>
> The magic rev is r1490375
>
> This is a release candidate, meaning if all go
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:02 AM, wrote:
> Author: ivan
> Date: Fri May 31 12:02:32 2013
> New Revision: 1488183
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1488183
> Log:
> Validate target working copy for mixed revisions, local modifications and
> switched subtrees before contacting server. Mixed revision w
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 1:28 AM, wrote:
> Author: danielsh
> Date: Sat Jun 1 05:28:20 2013
> New Revision: 1488464
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1488464
> Log:
> * STATUS: Block the r1488183 entry until Paul confirms what the revisions are.
>
> Modified:
> subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
>
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> Has anyone considered backporting the Ruby 1.9 compatability to the 1.7.x
> line?
Ben,
FWIW I still haven't succeeded in getting Ruby 1.9 work on Windows
with VS2012 yet, despite making some headway (see
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revi
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Paul,
>
> wrt the r1480344 group in STATUS: I think the 'rescue' block, here:
>
>ENV["PATH"].split(";").each do |path|
> +
> +# Change the cwd to path, but ignore non-existent paths.
> +begin
> +
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> The 1.7.10 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on May
> 30th so please try
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.6.22 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. We plan to try and release on May 30th
> so please try and g
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Paul Burba writes:
>
>> Bob's script is a different beast, there is a real problem there. I
>> will rewrite the test to demonstrate his scenario.
>
> It doesn't matter whether we use 1.7 or 1.8 for t
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 05:07:08PM +0200, Bert Huijben wrote:
>>> I think we still do, but how can we determine if an incoming 'delete
>>> ' sho
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 05:07:08PM +0200, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> I think we still do, but how can we determine if an incoming 'delete
>> ' should apply to a node that is not there?
>
> It sounds like you are still talking about a merge int
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-----
>> From: Paul Burba [mailto:ptbu...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: donderdag 16 mei 2013 16:10
>> To: Bert Huijben
>> Cc: Bob Cardillo; dev
>> Subject: Re: Sparse workin
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Bert Huijben [mailto:b...@qqmail.nl]
>> Sent: donderdag 16 mei 2013 17:07
>> To: 'Paul Burba'
>> Cc: 'Bob Cardillo'; 'dev'
>>
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 3:59 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Paul Burba [mailto:ptbu...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: donderdag 16 mei 2013 01:47
>> To: Bob Cardillo
>> Cc: dev
>> Subject: Re: Sparse working copy in 1.8.0 causes probl
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Bob Cardillo wrote:
>> I'm running Subversion 1.8.0-dev on Windows 7 Pro SP1.
>>
>> The following steps went through without error on 1.7.x, but they fail with
>> an error on
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Bob Cardillo wrote:
> I'm running Subversion 1.8.0-dev on Windows 7 Pro SP1.
>
> The following steps went through without error on 1.7.x, but they fail with
> an error on the last step when run on 1.8.0 (see below for full reproducible
> recipe):
Hi Bob,
Thanks f
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> Here it is: the second Release Candidate for Subversion 1.8.0. You can
> fetch the proposed tarballs from here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
>
> The magic rev is r1482456
>
> This is a release candidate, meaning if all g
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 04:14:36PM +0100, Philip Martin wrote:
>> The 1.7 files
>>
>>subversion/svn/main.c
>>subversion/svnserve/main.c
>>
>> were renamed in 1.8 to
>>
>>subversion/svn/svn.c
>>subversion/svnserve/svnserve.c
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> I (Julian Foad) wrote:
>
>> I (Julian Foad) wrote:
[...] can't we simply open [a session] before calling this
function, and let this function make simple calls to
svn_client__get_revision_number()?
>>>
>>> The attached patch im
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Hi Paul.
>
> A bit more review.
>
>> + If TARGETS contains a single URL and one or more relative paths, then
>> + set *RA_TARGET to a copy of that URL and *CONDENSED_PATHS to a copy of
>> + each relative path after the URL.
>> [...]
>> +re
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 3:24 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Paul,
>
> Was reviewing your svn_client_log5() changes. There are a couple of places
> in your reworked svn_client_log5() code (resolve_log_targets(),
> specifically) that read like so or similar:
>
>if (peg_revision->kind == svn_
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> Here it is: the first Release Candidate for Subversion 1.8.0. You can
> fetch the proposed tarballs from here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
>
> The magic rev is r1478983
Hi Ben,
Minor issue, but
https://dist.apache.org/
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: C. Michael Pilato [mailto:cmpil...@collab.net]
>> Sent: maandag 22 april 2013 15:46
>> To: Bert Huijben
>> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1469982 - in /subversion/trunk/subv
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> There is only one issue open against 1.8.0:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4358
>
> Based on what I understand I believe that issue can be moved to some
> future target since the conclusion seems to be it's not a blocker.
>
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Paul Burba writes:
>
>>> # We expect the repos root property to show up here!
>>>
>>> 1.9.0-dev@1475809>svn pg svn:auto-props . --show-inherited-props
>>>
>>> 1.9.0-dev@1475809>
&g
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>>
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Bert Huijben [mailto:b...@qqmail.nl]
>>> Sent: donderdag 25 april 2013 00:14
>>> To: &#x
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Bert Huijben [mailto:b...@qqmail.nl]
>> Sent: donderdag 25 april 2013 00:14
>> To: 'Paul Burba'; 'Subversion Development'
>> Subject: RE
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 7:42 AM, wrote:
> Author: rhuijben
> Date: Tue Apr 23 11:42:04 2013
> New Revision: 1470904
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1470904
> Log:
> * subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-metadata.sql
> (STMT_UPGRADE_31_SELECT_WCROOT_NODES): Replace some ugly SQL with some
> slightly les
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:00 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: pbu...@apache.org [mailto:pbu...@apache.org]
>> Sent: vrijdag 19 april 2013 20:22
>> To: comm...@subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: svn commit: r1469982 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion:
>> include/privat
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Should svn-role (the STATUS mergebot) use a 1.8 build for running 'merge'?
Most definitely yes IMO. If we aren't prepared to use 1.8-dev for
this, then we probably branched too soon (not that I think we did).
> IIRC we discussed this befor
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Paul Burba wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:15 PM, wrote:
>>> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2897
>>>
>>> User julianfoad changed the following:
>>>
>>>
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:15 PM, wrote:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2897
>
>
>
> User julianfoad changed the following:
>
> What|Old value |New value
>
>
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Christoph Schulz wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Paul Burba schrieb am Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:35:35 -0400:
>
>
>> Hi Christoph,
>>
>> If the left side of the merge doesn't equal the right side, but the
>> right side of the merge i
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:12 AM, Christoph Schulz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> in SVN 1.7.9 and earlier versions (als tested 1.7.7 and 1.7.8), it can
> happen that a merge succeeds although the patch definitely cannot be
> applied. This happens when the changeset to be applied deletes some lines at
> the v
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Paul Burba wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>>>> So, what to do exactly? Options seem to be:
>>>>
>>>
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.6.21 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on April
> 4th so please try and
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> The 1.7.9 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
> Please get the tarballs from
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
> and add your signatures there. I plan to try and release on April
> 4th so please try and
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Paul Burba wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
>>>> I have committed a complete fix, with the Summary of Conflicts as
>>>> discussed here, in <http://svn.apache.o
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Julian Foad
> wrote:
>> Paul Burba wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
>>>> Paul Burba wrote:
>>>>> I found the cause of the conflict
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
>
> --
> Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
> http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
> - Original Message -
>> From: Julian Foad
>> To: C. Michael Pilato
>> Cc: Subversion Development
>> Sent: Wednesday, 20 March
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:29 AM, wrote:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4098
>
> User rhuijben changed the following:
>
> What|Old value |New value
>
>
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:51 PM, wrote:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3295
>
> User rhuijben changed the following:
>
> What|Old value |New value
>
>
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Paul Burba writes:
>
>> Where we can improve is in skipping the '[Recording | Eliding]
>> mergeinfo' notifications if nothing was actually merged.
>
> Essentially we are skipping a reverse merge because
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Paul Burba writes:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Philip Martin
>> wrote:
>>> This is one of the issues blocking 1.8. I don't really understand the
>>> merge behaviour. Consider this tes
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> This is one of the issues blocking 1.8. I don't really understand the
> merge behaviour. Consider this test case: a file in a directory,
> branch, modify the file on the branch:
>
> svnadmin create repo
> svn -mm import repo/format file://`p
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> Whenever we approach a release we always face the question: Which of
> our open issues are blockers for the upcoming release? Obviously as
> we approach 1.8, anything with a target milestone of 1.8.0 is
> (supposedly) a blocke
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Stefan Küng wrote:
> On 15.03.2013 18:59, Paul Burba wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Stefan Küng
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15.03.2013 18:46, Paul Burba wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Stefan Küng wrote:
> On 15.03.2013 18:46, Paul Burba wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Stefan Küng
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> using a build from todays trunk:
>>>
>>> $ svn
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Stefan Küng wrote:
> Hi,
>
> using a build from todays trunk:
>
> $ svn co http://tortoisesvn.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/contrib/diff-scripts wc
> $ cd wc
> $ svn merge -r23995:23994
> http://tortoisesvn.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/contrib/diff-scripts/diff-doc.js
> dif
Whenever we approach a release we always face the question: Which of
our open issues are blockers for the upcoming release? Obviously as
we approach 1.8, anything with a target milestone of 1.8.0 is
(supposedly) a blocker. But what about all the issues with the '---'
target milestone? Very old i
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 4:41 AM, wrote:
> Author: rhuijben
> Date: Thu Apr 7 08:41:44 2011
> New Revision: 1089779
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1089779&view=rev
> Log:
> More preparation for allowing more kinds of shadowed updates: Show
> notifications of shadowed updates in the tree
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Paul Burba wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
>>> Paul Burba wrote:
>>>> I found the cause of the conflict filled reintegrate merge. The
>>>> automatic merge code s
Ignore the previous email, it was sent before it's time. I just
wanted to say that you need to update the doc strings for the
following (to reflect the removal of arguments):
collect_ignore_patterns
send_unversioned_item
one_child_status
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:46 AM, wrote:
> Author: rhuijb
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:46 AM, wrote:
> Author: rhuijben
> Date: Thu Mar 7 15:46:08 2013
> New Revision: 1453925
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1453925
> Log:
> Handle 'svn:ignore' and 'svn:global-ignores' values as a single list for
> status processing and for svn_wc_get_ignores2().
>
> This
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:37 PM, Julian Foad
wrote:
>
> --
> Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
> http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: Philip Martin
>> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Monday, 25 February 2013, 5:37
>
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Simon Large wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I have the TortoiseSVN build of the command line client, built against
> r1451811. I'm trying to update an upgraded 1.7 working copy from a
> repository served by svnserve 1.6.11
>
> Update from the repo root works OK, update from l
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Paul Burba wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Mark Phippard
>> wrote:
>>
>>> BTW, how are you managing your branch? I tried merging it back to
>>> trunk to get an idea on the
(Stefan - If you don't have time to read all this please at least take
a look at the short questions at the very end)
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> BTW, how are you managing your branch? I tried merging it back to
> trunk to get an idea on the diff and there were a lo
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:12 AM, wrote:
>> Author: rhuijben
>> Date: Thu Jan 31 14:12:53 2013
>> New Revision: 1440966
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1440966&view=rev
>> Log:
>&
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Paul Burba wrote:
>
>> Julian Foad wrote:
>>> I (Julian Foad) wrote on 2013-01-31:
>>>
>>>> Hi Paul. Not sure about this...
>>>
>>> 1441810 fixes this and extends the test.
>>
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1414123&view=rev
>
>> Log:
>> In preparation for further performance improvements, make the
>> retrieval of inherited properties use a constant number of db
>> operations.
>
> My comments are about the exi
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> I (Julian Foad) wrote on 2013-01-31:
>
>> Hi Paul. Not sure about this...
>
> 1441810 fixes this and extends the test.
Thanks Julian.
I added r1441810 to the issue #4306 group on 1.7.x, with the caveat
that property conflicts are not handled
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:12 AM, wrote:
> Author: rhuijben
> Date: Thu Jan 31 14:12:53 2013
> New Revision: 1440966
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1440966&view=rev
> Log:
> In the merge handling: make the tree conflict detection for directories work
> like that in the update editor: De
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: rhuij...@apache.org [mailto:rhuij...@apache.org]
>> Sent: zaterdag 26 januari 2013 00:55
>> To: comm...@subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: svn commit: r1438778 -
>> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Julian Foad
>> wrote:
>>> Summary: I plan to make 'svn merge' act on --accept=theirs|mine|etc. per
>>> fi
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Julian Foad
> wrote:
>> Summary: I plan to make 'svn merge' act on --accept=theirs|mine|etc. per
>> file, rather than (as it does now) postponing all conflicts until after
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Summary: I plan to make 'svn merge' act on --accept=theirs|mine|etc. per
> file, rather than (as it does now) postponing all conflicts until after the
> whole merge and then resolving them.
>
>
> I have been investigating the way "--accept=fo
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>
>> I was testing recent changes in ra_serf update editor and noticed that
>> reintegrate-like merges for long living branches are extremely slow.
>> Client requests server for diff between branches with respect to
>> ancest
Re the roadmap item "Issue Triage -- Review open issues for the 1.8.0,
1.8-consider, and 1.7.x, milestones". A quick overview of where we
are:
There are 8 issues with the 1.7.x milestone. I reviewed each, none of
them is a 1.8 blocker. All are either neon-only or are limited to
1.7.x and are al
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:12 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 01/15/2013 11:43 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> I've made several commits to sort these tests out (r1433468 et al).
>
> Thanks, Stefan. Unless I'm overlooking something, we now have no XFAIL
> tests which lack an issue designation.
Qu
62XFAIL update locally moved dir with incoming file
These three have previously been discussed (and don't appear to be
1.8.0 blockers):
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Stefa
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:09 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 01/11/2013 04:28 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
>> I'm merely pointing out that the current behavior regarding the
>> *default* is bizarre IMO. I could have the global-ignores option
>> *purposefully* commented o
ab.net -- Enterprise Cloud Development
Skype: ptburba
> I don't think we can really change that for 1.x.
>
> Bert Huijben (Cell phone)
> From: Paul Burba
> Sent: 11-1-2013 21:36
> To: Subversion Development
> Subject: Do we expect default ignores when no ignores are defined
&
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Paul Burba [mailto:ptbu...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: donderdag 10 januari 2013 19:59
>> To: Bert Huijben
>> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r14
1 - 100 of 653 matches
Mail list logo
