RE: 1.9 issues

2014-01-28 Thread Bert Huijben
> -Original Message- > From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com] > Sent: dinsdag 28 januari 2014 14:20 > To: Bert Huijben > Cc: Branko Čibej; dev@subversion.apache.org > Subject: Re: 1.9 issues > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Bert Huijben wrote: &g

Re: 1.9 issues

2014-01-28 Thread Branko Čibej
On 28.01.2014 14:19, Greg Stein wrote: > And your minor fixes to mtcc.h didn't deal with the extern issue. Actually, the private headers in the source directories aren't consistent about extern "C", so I wouldn't dwell too much on this. I don't see a problem here, because no-one except our build

Re: 1.9 issues

2014-01-28 Thread Greg Stein
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Bert Huijben wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com] >> Sent: dinsdag 28 januari 2014 12:12 >> To: Bert Huijben >> Cc: Branko Čibej; dev@subversion.apache.org >> Subject: Re: 1.9 issue

RE: 1.9 issues

2014-01-28 Thread Bert Huijben
> -Original Message- > From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com] > Sent: dinsdag 28 januari 2014 12:12 > To: Bert Huijben > Cc: Branko Čibej; dev@subversion.apache.org > Subject: Re: 1.9 issues > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Bert Huijben wrote: > >.

Re: 1.9 issues

2014-01-28 Thread Greg Stein
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Bert Huijben wrote: >... > And in many discussions the result is that we should have never introduced > libsvn_wc and libsvn_client as separate libraries. Could we take every function in svn_wc_private.h and move them into libsvn_client? (I'm assuming those functi

Re: 1.9 issues

2014-01-25 Thread Branko Čibej
On 24.01.2014 23:30, Bert Huijben wrote: > 4) Should we expose editor v2? > Personally, I think that (given that nothing has changed to verify the > implementation) we should hide it as private api, just like we did for 1.8. > There are still quite a few known issues in the implementation and I don

RE: 1.9 issues

2014-01-24 Thread Bert Huijben
> -Original Message- > From: Ben Reser [mailto:b...@reser.org] > Sent: vrijdag 24 januari 2014 18:21 > To: Subversion Development > Subject: 1.9 issues > > As we approach a 1.9 release (not sure what our time frame for release is but > I > think we were expecting roughly a year in Berlin

RE: 1.9 issues

2014-01-24 Thread Bert Huijben
? Bert From: Branko Čibej [mailto:br...@wandisco.com] Sent: vrijdag 24 januari 2014 21:29 To: dev@subversion.apache.org Subject: Re: 1.9 issues On 24.01.2014 18:20, Ben Reser wrote: 2) libsvn_client_mtcc_*: Should these exist at all or be moved to another library? This

Re: 1.9 issues

2014-01-24 Thread Branko Čibej
On 24.01.2014 18:20, Ben Reser wrote: > 2) libsvn_client_mtcc_*: Should these exist at all or be moved to another > library? This conversation died out. I asked for this API to be marked experimental, and was ignored. I'm not at all happy about that. I'm going to take this opportunity to say -1

Re: 1.9 issues

2014-01-24 Thread Ben Reser
On 1/24/14, 9:49 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > My intention is to move into 'svn'. I have started this already but > got side-tracked and didn't get to finish it. I'll try to pick this up. Thanks. > That's because of my fix for issue #4426 (r1524145). I'd be fine > with reverting that change if no

Re: 1.9 issues

2014-01-24 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 09:20:35AM -0800, Ben Reser wrote: > As we approach a 1.9 release (not sure what our time frame for release is but > I > think we were expecting roughly a year in Berlin last year) I think there are > several issues that need to be discussed and final decisions made. I don