On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> My intention was to wait 72 hours and merge giving people a chance to
> object to the feature or implementation. However, I said next week
> because 72 hours would have had me merging this weekend, which I
> didn't figure was realistic. But you
Ben Reser wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
>> Only the standard general benefits of committing separate changes
>> separately, such as being able to revert one without another, or
>> backport one without another, or review one at a time.
>
> The changes in the branch are clearly split. I could proba
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Only the standard general benefits of committing separate changes separately,
> such as being able to revert one without another, or backport one without
> another, or review one at a time.
The changes in the branch are clearly split. I cou
Ben Reser wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
>> Just a thought. Some of these changes are significant (in both
>> lines touched and functionality) on their own. One that stands
>> out is "svnserve --config-file no longer caches the password and
>> authz db ...". Would it be a good idea (and not too m
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:41 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> +1, but why wait until next week? If you are confident in your changes,
> then get 'em into the practically visible/reviewable space ASAP! At this
> point in the merry month of December, "next week" for many folks translates
> effective
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Just a thought. Some of these changes are significant (in both lines touched
> and functionality) on their own. One that stands out is "svnserve
> --config-file no longer caches the password and authz db ...". Would it be a
> good idea (a
Ben Reser wrote:
> I've finished the work needed to implement in-repo-authz on the branch.
>
> I'd like to merge this code back to trunk. If there are no objections
> I'll merge it into trunk next week.
>
> Please review my changes. You can view the overall set of changes
> that would be merge
On 12/18/2012 10:41 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> I've finished the work needed to implement in-repo-authz on the branch.
>
> I'd like to merge this code back to trunk. If there are no objections
> I'll merge it into trunk next week.
+1, but why wait until next week? If you are confident in your chang
Sounds great!
Just recently I was talking to people who wrote their own web frontend
wrapper to manage authz. I believe this new feature will make things easier
for them since it allows them to skip the authz file deploy step.
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 07:41:11PM -0800, Ben Reser wrote:
> I've fini
9 matches
Mail list logo
