Re: Patch to remove libsvn_ra_neon

2012-06-13 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 12:20:20AM +0200, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:57 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 01:47:13PM +0200, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > >> We've had the "should we remove neon?" discussion before, and the > >> consensus has felt to resolve i

Re: Patch to remove libsvn_ra_neon

2012-06-13 Thread Hyrum K Wright
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:47 AM, Hyrum K Wright > wrote: >> We've had the "should we remove neon?" discussion before, and the >> consensus has felt to resolve in the affirmative.  Now is the time for >> action. >> >> I've got a 586 kb patch whi

Re: Patch to remove libsvn_ra_neon

2012-06-13 Thread Greg Stein
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:47 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > We've had the "should we remove neon?" discussion before, and the > consensus has felt to resolve in the affirmative.  Now is the time for > action. > > I've got a 586 kb patch which removes libsvn_ra_neon from trunk.  It > doesn't not remov

Re: Patch to remove libsvn_ra_neon

2012-06-13 Thread Greg Stein
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 01:47:13PM +0200, Hyrum K Wright wrote: >> We've had the "should we remove neon?" discussion before, and the >> consensus has felt to resolve in the affirmative.  Now is the time for >> action. > > We should move thi

Re: Patch to remove libsvn_ra_neon

2012-06-12 Thread Hyrum K Wright
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:57 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 01:47:13PM +0200, Hyrum K Wright wrote: >> We've had the "should we remove neon?" discussion before, and the >> consensus has felt to resolve in the affirmative.  Now is the time for >> action. > > We should move th

Re: Patch to remove libsvn_ra_neon

2012-06-12 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 01:47:13PM +0200, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > We've had the "should we remove neon?" discussion before, and the > consensus has felt to resolve in the affirmative. Now is the time for > action. We should move this issue into the 1.8.0 milestone if neon is deleted: http://subve

Re: Patch to remove libsvn_ra_neon

2012-06-12 Thread C. Michael Pilato
On 06/12/2012 03:20 PM, Daniel Klíma wrote: > I think, it needs to be postponed as at least one server is failing > with serf: http://svn.ali.as/cpan Unfortunately it took bit long to > verify error using TortoiseSVN custom built with 1.8-trunk due to time > constraints and to verify it with svn it

Re: Patch to remove libsvn_ra_neon

2012-06-12 Thread C. Michael Pilato
On 06/12/2012 03:20 PM, Daniel Klíma wrote: > I think, it needs to be postponed as at least one server is failing > with serf: http://svn.ali.as/cpan Unfortunately it took bit long to > verify error using TortoiseSVN custom built with 1.8-trunk due to time > constraints and to verify it with svn it

Re: Patch to remove libsvn_ra_neon

2012-06-12 Thread Daniel Klíma
2012/6/12 Hyrum K Wright : > We've had the "should we remove neon?" discussion before, and the > consensus has felt to resolve in the affirmative.  Now is the time for > action. > > I've got a 586 kb patch which removes libsvn_ra_neon from trunk.  It > doesn't not remove the --http-library runtime

Patch to remove libsvn_ra_neon

2012-06-12 Thread Hyrum K Wright
We've had the "should we remove neon?" discussion before, and the consensus has felt to resolve in the affirmative. Now is the time for action. I've got a 586 kb patch which removes libsvn_ra_neon from trunk. It doesn't not remove the --http-library runtime option or config file code, but does r