On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 12:52:25AM +, Julian Foad wrote:
> > >
> > > Right now, the no_ignore parameter only disables global ignores,
> > > and svn:ignore ignores are always ignored.
> >
> > No, that's not right. I just tried it with a trunk build. I set
> > 'svn:ignore' to ignore the file na
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 12:11:09AM +, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-02-02, 'Stefan Sperling' wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:12:42PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
> > > In this libsvn_client_addX() case it would be adding an extra boolean to
> > > pass to the new svn_client_addX() functi
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 08:50:46PM -0800, Joe Swatosh wrote:
> Mimic stsp's r905799 to get the build working again.
+1 to commit.
Thanks,
Stefan
>
> [[[
>
> Follow-up to r905787:
>
> * build/generator/gen_win.py
> (WinGeneratorBase._create_sqlite_headers): Track parameter list change for
>
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:17:25PM -0800, Joe Swatosh wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 4:02 AM, wrote:
> > Author: stsp
> > Date: Tue Feb 2 12:02:40 2010
> > New Revision: 905595
> >
>
> > + "Use inetd mode or tunnel mode if you need this.]")},
> > #ifdef CONNECTION_HAVE_THREAD_OPTION
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Julian Foad [mailto:julianf...@btopenworld.com]
> Sent: woensdag 3 februari 2010 1:11
> To: 'Stefan Sperling'
> Cc: Bert Huijben; 'Subversion Development'
> Subject: Re: two questions (and a proposed patch) regarding svn:ignore
>
> On Tue, 2010-02-02, 'Stefan
Bert Huijben wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Julian Foad [mailto:julianf...@btopenworld.com]
> > While we're revving it, consider this API design point. We pass the list
> > of global ignores in to the function through the CTX parameter. It seems
> > stupid to have an additional par
On Mon, 2010-02-01, Philip Martin wrote:
> "C. Michael Pilato" writes:
>
> > Oh, I dunno. r8391162080374191731 seems a bit ... off. (But yes, the
> > regexps don't match -- they expect "Recording mergeinfo for reverse merge"
> > but get "Recording mergeinfo for merge" (no "reverse").
>
> I did
> -Original Message-
> From: s...@apache.org [mailto:s...@apache.org]
> Sent: woensdag 3 februari 2010 12:54
> To: comm...@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: svn commit: r906016 -
> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_client/patch.c
>
> Author: stsp
> Date: Wed Feb 3 11:53:32 2010
> New R
Julian Foad writes:
> On Mon, 2010-02-01, Philip Martin wrote:
>> "C. Michael Pilato" writes:
>>
>> > Oh, I dunno. r8391162080374191731 seems a bit ... off. (But yes, the
>> > regexps don't match -- they expect "Recording mergeinfo for reverse merge"
>> > but get "Recording mergeinfo for merg
> -Original Message-
> From: Julian Foad [mailto:julian.f...@wandisco.com]
> Sent: woensdag 3 februari 2010 12:30
> To: Bert Huijben
> Cc: 'Stefan Sperling'; 'Bert Huijben'; 'Subversion Development'
> Subject: RE: two questions (and a proposed patch) regarding svn:ignore
>
> Bert Huijben
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 01:27:31PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
> I thinks something like svn_wc__node_get_kind() would be enough here.
How can that tell me if the directory is unversioned?
I want to skip unversioned directories.
Stefan
Philip Martin wrote:
> Julian Foad writes:
>
> > On Mon, 2010-02-01, Philip Martin wrote:
> >> "C. Michael Pilato" writes:
> >>
> >> > Oh, I dunno. r8391162080374191731 seems a bit ... off. (But yes, the
> >> > regexps don't match -- they expect "Recording mergeinfo for reverse
> >> > merge"
committed in r906059. thanks!
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 23:50, Joe Swatosh wrote:
> Mimic stsp's r905799 to get the build working again.
>
> [[[
>
> Follow-up to r905787:
>
> * build/generator/gen_win.py
> (WinGeneratorBase._create_sqlite_headers): Track parameter list change for
> transform_sql.
jerenkra...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: jerenkrantz
> Date: Wed Feb 3 07:09:43 2010
> New Revision: 905916
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=905916&view=rev
> Log:
> * site-nav.html: Put a link to HACKING on the left-side 'cuz I spent way too
> much time looking for it...and failing.
Dud
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:14 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> jerenkra...@apache.org wrote:
>> Author: jerenkrantz
>> Date: Wed Feb 3 07:09:43 2010
>> New Revision: 905916
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=905916&view=rev
>> Log:
>> * site-nav.html: Put a link to HACKING on the left-side '
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
>> Dude, please revert this change. One of the problems I'd like to get away
>> from with this new website is broken idea that "if it's something I need, it
>> must be something everybody needs". Our left-nav isn't a Site Map (though I
>
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> The Getting Involved page is not for you, it is for completely new
> users coming to the community. HACKING is completely useless to those
> people, or at least completely overwhelming. I do not see any intent
> to hide HACKING. The only re
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> The Getting Involved page is not for you, it is for completely new
>> users coming to the community. HACKING is completely useless to those
>> people, or at least completely overwh
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> I'm sorry, but content in HACKING should be easily found - and when
> you intentionally hide it like we are doing, I think it hurts the
> community. I find the "Getting Involved" page - as written - to be
> completely useless compared to what is in HACKING.
>
> I really
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> No, it wasn't linked anywhere on the sidebar. It wasn't even
> mentioned on the top-half of the "Getting Involved" - the only link I
> found is in the second-to-last bullet point of that page. In my
> school of web design, that is a very hidden link. So, it must mean
>
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 12:52:25AM +, Julian Foad wrote:
> > I think the rule is (not just for 'svn add', but for all svn commands
> > that do this kind of ignoring):
> >
> > a file is ignored iff
> > (it matches the svn:ignore property or the global-ignores sett
I'm seeing patch regression tests failures on trunk:
CMD: svn patch
/home/pm/sw/subversion/obj/subversion/tests/cmdline/svn-test-work/local_tmp/tmp3Grvg3
svn-test-work/working_copies/patch_tests-9 --dry-run --config-dir
/home/pm/sw/subversion/obj/subversion/tests/cmdline/svn-test-work/local_tmp
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:57 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Justin, we're trying to aim our content at a wide variety of individuals,
> from those who've only heard of Subversion to those that use it heavily to
> those that are developing it. And yeah, I admit that I've been trying to
> give non-d
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:00 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> No, it wasn't linked anywhere on the sidebar. It wasn't even
>> mentioned on the top-half of the "Getting Involved" - the only link I
>> found is in the second-to-last bullet point of that page. In my
>> schoo
Philip Martin writes:
> Note the silly fuzz values. Valgrind shows:
I just got r906107, the problem is still there but the call stack is
slightly different:
$ valgrind -q ../../../subversion/svn/.libs/lt-svn patch x.patch
svn-test-work/working_copies/patch_tests-9
U svn-test-work/wor
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:57 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> In my mind, the point of being an open-source project is that we are
> trying to encourage contributions. Users are a happy and fortunate
> side-effect. So, when our website s
> All I'm asking is that we add something somewhere in a prominent place
>> that *clearly* points to our document that says: "If you are
>> contributing to the Subversion project, please read this first".
>> Nothing more, nothing less.
>
> This would be good to add in the Getting Involved page.
A
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:35 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> My only objection is to the notion that we have tried to hide it.
Intentionally? Certainly not.
Have we hidden it? Yes, I feel we have.
My $.02. -- justin
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:44 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> All I'm asking is that we add something somewhere in a prominent place
>>> that *clearly* points to our document that says: "If you are
>>> contributing to the Subversion project, please read this first".
>>> Nothing more, nothing less.
>
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:44 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>> All I'm asking is that we add something somewhere in a prominent place
that *clearly* points to our document that says: "If you are
contributing to the Subversion pro
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> This is progress - but I still think a link on the sidebar to
> "Subversion Community Guide" is warranted.
>
> BTW, I am not happy that you reverted my commit. I would hope we
> agree that the world is not set on fire while we continue this
> discussion and try to reach
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> BTW, I am not happy that you reverted my commit. I would hope we
> agree that the world is not set on fire while we continue this
> discussion and try to reach a happy ending. -- justin
Pardon for the navel-gazing here, but the more I'm
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:19 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> In my head, it wasn't a reversion -- it was a revision. I honestly thought
> that you'd be okay with the change, having taken this statement:
I think if you place yourself in my shoes, I think perhaps you'd
understand why I view it as a
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> 18) See email from Mark screaming "FOUL!" all over the place
> 19) ...see that my explanations are ignored and the change is reverted
> anyway...
>
> So, I'm now left wondering why I bothered at all.
>
> This isn't the constructive tone
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> I think Mike's original point is that he has been trying to engage the
> list about what links belong all along. There has been some feedback,
> some on IRC, some here. I thought he was just saying to you that it
> was not right to come in a
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> I think Mike's original point is that he has been trying to engage the
>> list about what links belong all along. There has been some feedback,
>> some on IRC, some here. I though
On Feb 3, 2010, at 11:36 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:19 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> In my head, it wasn't a reversion -- it was a revision. I honestly thought
>> that you'd be okay with the change, having taken this statement:
>
> I think if you place yourself i
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:19 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> In my head, it wasn't a reversion -- it was a revision. I honestly thought
>> that you'd be okay with the change, having taken this statement:
>
> I think if you place yourself in my shoes, I think perhaps you
- Original Message
> From: Justin Erenkrantz
> To: Mark Phippard
> Cc: C. Michael Pilato ; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 12:45:39 PM
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r905916 - /subversion/site/publish/site-nav.html
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Mark Phippard w
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:55 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Life is like a version control system with no obliterate feature. Change
> comes only via the addition of new revisions. So what can I do to make you
> less unhappy in HEAD?
*grins*
I guess I've not been clear that I do like the curren
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 04:27:39PM +, Philip Martin wrote:
> Philip Martin writes:
>
> > Note the silly fuzz values. Valgrind shows:
>
> I just got r906107, the problem is still there but the call stack is
> slightly different:
>
> $ valgrind -q ../../../subversion/svn/.libs/lt-svn patch
Stefan Sperling writes:
> Does this fix it?
>
> Index: subversion/svn/notify.c
> ===
> --- subversion/svn/notify.c (revision 906159)
> +++ subversion/svn/notify.c (working copy)
> @@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ notify(void *baton, const svn
A pitfall that I'd like us to avoid is the one that assumes that every piece
of information of interested must be only a single click away. That might
have been true in 1994 because of typical network speeds. But that's not
reality today. The site as it sits today is laid out with what I think i
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:01 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> A pitfall that I'd like us to avoid is the one that assumes that every piece
> of information of interested must be only a single click away. That might
> have been true in 1994 because of typical network speeds. But that's not
> realit
Я писал в своём письме Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:50:37
+0300:
C. Michael Pilato писал в своём письме Sat, 30 Jan
2010 01:55:36 +0300:
Mark Phippard wrote:
2010/1/29 Роман Донченко :
I meant the license file that you've just deleted, but I guess it's no
longer an issue. 8=]
Still:
1) The ref
The URL in contrib/README refers to a page on the old
subversion.tigris.org website which no
longer works. See, for example:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/contrib/README
I poked around the subversion.apache.org website but couldn't find a
page with that name.
Skip Montana
Skip Montanaro wrote:
> The URL in contrib/README refers to a page on the old
> subversion.tigris.org website which no
> longer works. See, for example:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/contrib/README
>
> I poked around the subversion.apache.org website but couldn't find
>> I really, really don't want to put any links in the left-nav proper to
>> destinations that don't carry that menu. I cannot stress this enough. A
>> site visitor should reasonably expect that the menu that helps him or her
>> get around the site also keeps them "on the (branded) site". And as
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:15 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> My hunch is that HACKING probably ought to be split up rather than
>> kept as a monolithic big guide.
>
> I've already lost one battle for splitting up HACKING, so you can wage this
> one yourself, buddy. :-)
Since I was the biggest adv
C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> It's becoming more clear to me every moment that my personal design
> philosophies don't gel with apparent community needs and inherited policies.
> That's fine -- on my list of Major Life Problems, this doesn't even rate a
> footnote. If I'm honest with myself (which f
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
>> Would could physically move the Release Notes section into a new
>> docs/release-notes/index.html, expand that simple list of links a bit to
>> mention (in a non-detailed way) the "big highlights" of each release ("file
>> locking", "mer
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:22 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Oh, yuck. In the wrong frame of mind, this reads like "I'm taking my toys
> and going home." That's not the intent. Was just trying to say that I'm
> cognizant of my tendency to be a stickler for certain ideals even at the
> cost of oth
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> FWIW, I think we should emulate the side-bar on http://activemq.apache.org/
>
> *hides from C-Mike's screaming*
How can one scream when one is an OCD-induced coma? :-)
--
C. Michael Pilato
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
s
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> But as I said before, I have zero objection to splitting it up. I
> just do not think it will make it easier to work with.
Since we're already having fun with mod_include, here's my suggestion:
- Split it up into several files - likely wit
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 04:42:36PM -0500, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > FWIW, I think we should emulate the side-bar on http://activemq.apache.org/
> >
> > *hides from C-Mike's screaming*
>
> How can one scream when one is an OCD-induced coma? :-)
I like the way they h
Hi,
i have observed a strange behaviour of svnsync in partially replicating
a repository (In my opinion)..
Created a local repository (svnadmin create...) change the
pre-revprop-change hook to accept changes...and then
i initialized svnsync like the following:
svnsync init file:///usr/loc
I'm glad this thread is back on track. As I read it, I was thinking
much the same as Hyrum. But I was driving to Miami, rather than
reading mailing lists :-P
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 14:01, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>...
> That really only leaves the "Version Control with Subversion" link to deal
>
57 matches
Mail list logo
