On 17.01.2011 08:08, Gavin Beau Baumanis wrote:
> Is the answer not;
> Code to the manner that provides the greatest return on a developer's time
> for THIS problem.
You have to take into account the cost of maintaining the code, too.
For example, it's usually "fastest" to not worry about coupli
On Thu, 2011-01-13, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 13.01.2011 20:01, Julian Foad wrote:
> > I have committed the ref counting for pristine texts (r1058523) and have
> > had a bit more insight into when to perform the deletion.
> >
> > Deleting unreferenced texts on closing a "wcroot" is too late - too
>
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Just want to say thanks for your feedback, Brane. Due to other work
> commitments I may not have much time to take this forward over the next
> three weeks.
Are you planning to work on improved branching and merging in place of
finishing the
On 17.01.2011 14:45, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>
>> Just want to say thanks for your feedback, Brane. Due to other work
>> commitments I may not have much time to take this forward over the next
>> three weeks.
> Are you planning to work on improve
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 17.01.2011 14:45, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Julian Foad
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Just want to say thanks for your feedback, Brane. Due to other work
>>> commitments I may not have much time to take this forward ove
It looks like Philip's list was added to the issue tracker with the
1.7.0 milestone. Nice.
I know CMike has been going through that list and fixing, closing,
moving items. Are all of the items left in the list things that we
definitely want/need for the release? For example, I see a couple of
t
On Mon, 2011-01-17, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> > On 17.01.2011 14:45, Mark Phippard wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Julian Foad
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just want to say thanks for your feedback, Brane. Due to other work
> >>> commit
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-17, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> > On 17.01.2011 14:45, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Julian Foad
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Just want to say th
Hi guys,
I was looking through the "Getting Involved" section of the Subversion
website, and decided to start by writing a regression test for an
issue, starting with 3686 (executable flag not correctly set on
merge). This issue was already assigned to someone, so apologies if
it's already being w
Hi Brane,
I certainly do take maintainability seriously.
What's that well-quoted figure?
Something like 80% of the cost of software development is spent in the
development phase?
Within the context of Subversion
And the lessons learnt from libsvn_wc and with constant peer-review, is a
truly awf
On 17.01.2011 23:07, Gavin Beau Baumanis wrote:
> Hi Brane,
> I certainly do take maintainability seriously.
> What's that well-quoted figure?
> Something like 80% of the cost of software development is spent in the
> development phase?
I believe it's "should be spent" rather than "is spent" ...
I've been looking at which bugs can be closed by the pending
completion of wc-ng. In particular, I've been looking at issue #1284:
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1284
The issue is essentially a complaint about the performance of 'svn mv
somedir targetdir' when the number of f
Hi Brane,
I'm pretty sure the context of the quote is along the lines of;
Poor design and implementation proves to be a burden in terms of maintenance
costs, in the long run.
And instead of having bums on seats for (entirely) new development, manpower
is, instead, wasted on maintenance tasks b
HI David,
As the Patch Manager, I notice that your latest patch proposal has still has
not received any comments.
At this stage I would normally attach the patch to a new / existing issue and
pass the details back into this thread.
Since you have previously used the issue tracker, would you li
Ping. This submission has received no new comments.
On 06/01/2011, at 1:17 AM, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
> Noorul Islam K M writes:
>
>> Julian Foad writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2010-12-02, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
>>>
Noorul Islam K M writes:
> When I was trying to come up with a pa
Attempting to perform high commit rates into an fsfs repository on NFS with two
or more Linux boxes, one of the processes can get stuck in fcntl() for over 30
seconds:
open("repo/db/write-lock", O_RDWR) = 4
fcntl(4, F_SETLKW, {type=F_WRLCK, whence=SEEK_SET, start=0, len=0}
Sample Python s
On 1/17/11 8:42 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
Questions:
1) Is there a better algorithm than exponential sleeps for a resource when you
need to explicitly try to get the resource? I've noticed that having a slow and
a fast Linux client trying to do as many commits per second, the fast one locks
out the
Gavin Beau Baumanis writes:
> Ping. This submission has received no new comments.
>
I will be re-submitting this patch once the discussion going on in the
following thread concludes.
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0210.shtml
I think you can remove this patch from your watch list becaus
Hi All,
It is a very interesting notion that Gavin throws at us. I think it is
very important for an open-source project to maintain it's code in a way
that it is easy for a new guy (like me) to make quick and meaningful
changes. Most open-source projects with a large development community
en
Translation status report for trunk@r1060185
lang trans untrans fuzzy obs
--
de2051 128 239 201
es1988 191 273 340
fr2139 40 75 43
it1837 342 472 164
ja1980
On 1/17/11 9:28 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
On 1/17/11 8:42 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
The random implementation seems a little harder, for a portable one, possible
implementations:
1) apr_generate_random_bytes()
On Unix, this opens DEV_RANDOM, which seems heavy for this issue.
2) apr_md5_init()
Hash th
21 matches
Mail list logo
