> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
> Sent: vrijdag 18 mei 2012 8:07
> To: Bert Huijben
> Cc: Hyrum K Wright; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1339892 -
>
> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>>
>> Editor v1 only requires the revision for base node replacements and I
>> don't see why we need to change that for v2.
>>
>> If we copied a subtree from a revision we know that that revi
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
> Editor v1 only requires the revision for base node replacements and I
> don't see why we need to change that for v2.
>
> If we copied a subtree from a revision we know that that revision
> didn't change. How could it be out of date?
The FS
n.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1339892
- /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs/editor.c
On May 17, 2012 10:38 PM, "Hyrum K Wright"
wrote:
>
> Thanks for taking a look. It feels like all of these are issues with
> the complex copies and inheriting the correct replacement
On May 17, 2012 10:38 PM, "Hyrum K Wright"
wrote:
>
> Thanks for taking a look. It feels like all of these are issues with
> the complex copies and inheriting the correct replacement revision.
> The problem then lies back in the commit driver, but I don't think it
> will be too hard to track down
Thanks for taking a look. It feels like all of these are issues with
the complex copies and inheriting the correct replacement revision.
The problem then lies back in the commit driver, but I don't think it
will be too hard to track down.
The blame test failure is an unrelated EOL repairing issue
Notes:
copy 29: a mixed-rev child of a copied parent that is re-copied to
pick up a different source revision needs to specify that parent
revision for REPLACES_REV. Since it passes SVN_INVALID_REVNUM, the
existence check comes into play, and the node exists (implicitly as a
result of copying the
Hyrum,
This fixes the two tree_conflict tests you mentioned, and blame 7
continues to fail.
However, it introduced failures in copy 29, merge 18, and switch 33.
Each one has the error that I just added. I haven't investigated yet:
it could be that a different error was expected.
(all this on the
8 matches
Mail list logo
