Re: svn commit: r1068029 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c

2011-02-10 Thread Stefan Küng
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:47, Bert Huijben wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: stevek...@apache.org [mailto:stevek...@apache.org] > > Sent: maandag 7 februari 2011 18:43 > > To: comm...@subversion.apache.org > > Subject: svn commit: r106802

RE: svn commit: r1068029 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c

2011-02-10 Thread Bert Huijben
> -Original Message- > From: stevek...@apache.org [mailto:stevek...@apache.org] > Sent: maandag 7 februari 2011 18:43 > To: comm...@subversion.apache.org > Subject: svn commit: r1068029 - > /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c

Re: svn commit: r1068029 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c

2011-02-08 Thread Stefan Küng
On 08.02.2011 03:58, Daniel Shahaf wrote: The new function should be marked 'static'. Also, they aren't in the proper namespaces: one is in svn_ despite being file-private, and the other is in apr_'s space. renamed in r1068520. Stefan -- ___ oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile" (_,

Re: svn commit: r1068029 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c

2011-02-07 Thread Daniel Shahaf
The new function should be marked 'static'. Also, they aren't in the proper namespaces: one is in svn_ despite being file-private, and the other is in apr_'s space. stevek...@apache.org wrote on Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 17:43:25 -: > Author: steveking > Date: Mon Feb 7 17:43:24 2011 > New Revisi

Re: svn commit: r1068029 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c

2011-02-07 Thread Blair Zajac
On 02/07/2011 09:43 AM, stevek...@apache.org wrote: Author: steveking Date: Mon Feb 7 17:43:24 2011 New Revision: 1068029 + +/* This is correct, we don't twist the filename if it is will + * definately be shorter than 248 characters. It merits some Little grammar and spelling cleanup