This is a great simplification, but it makes me wonder... how did that
original version even get conceived?
On Mar 11, 2011 3:53 AM, wrote:
> Author: julianfoad
> Date: Fri Mar 11 08:53:14 2011
> New Revision: 1080489
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1080489&view=rev
> Log:
> Simplify a S
On 11.03.2011 12:05, Greg Stein wrote:
> This is a great simplification, but it makes me wonder... how did that
> original version even get conceived?
Looks like someone took a hint my NODES_CURRENT view but didn't
understand why it was more complicated than this one. :)
-- Brane
Dongsheng Song writes:
> [[[
> * subversion/libsvn_repos/commit.c: Make translator happy.
(svn_repos__post_commit_error_str): Copy string into correct
pool, tweak error text to make translator happy.
The pool change should be mentioned in the log. +1 to commit
--
Philip
A second pair of eyes, please?
[[[
* subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.h
(svn_wc__db_node_hidden): Improve the doc string, not to send the
reader to a chain of old WC-1 documentation.
Index: subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.h
===
--- subver
Julian Foad writes:
> -/* An analog to svn_wc__entry_is_hidden(). Set *HIDDEN to TRUE if
> - LOCAL_ABSPATH in DB "is not present, and I haven't scheduled something
> - over the top of it." */
> +/* Set *HIDDEN to TRUE if LOCAL_ABSPATH in DB "is not present, and I haven't
> + scheduled some
Hi All,
I reviewed the patch and I am fine with it.
We did not hear any technical objections for this patch so far.
Bert said we can implement it via separate dry_run editor but it would
end up copying the code from subversion/libsvn_wc/update_editor.c as we
need access to wc.
Anyways we ha
Hi All,
This patch adds a test to make sure that conflict resolution files are
not created in the event of a *dry-run* merge that has binary file
conflicts.
The relevant discussion on dev@ is here ->
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-03/0145.shtml
Regards,
Arwin Arni
On Friday 11 March 2011 08:26 PM, Arwin Arni wrote:
Hi All,
This patch adds a test to make sure that conflict resolution files are
not created in the event of a *dry-run* merge that has binary file
conflicts.
The relevant discussion on dev@ is here ->
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-03/
I'm having trouble getting the patch to apply cleanly, but don't sweat it --
I'll apply it by hand.
On 03/11/2011 10:03 AM, Arwin Arni wrote:
> On Friday 11 March 2011 08:26 PM, Arwin Arni wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> This patch adds a test to make sure that conflict resolution files are not
>> created
On 03/11/2011 10:03 AM, Arwin Arni wrote:
> Index: ../subversion/tests/cmdline/merge_tests.py
> ===
> --- ../subversion/tests/cmdline/merge_tests.py(revision 1080126)
> +++ ../subversion/tests/cmdline/merge_tests.py(wor
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 12:17:38PM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 11.03.2011 12:05, Greg Stein wrote:
> > This is a great simplification, but it makes me wonder... how did that
> > original version even get conceived?
>
> Looks like someone took a hint my NODES_CURRENT view but didn't
> understan
On IRC, there was a discussion about the wc_db API. In particular
whether to have lots of query functions, or to have the caller sort it
out. As Bert noted, my original intent was to provide the caller with
enough information and let it sort everything out. That keeps the API
cleaner, and it also m
By Simon Phipp's scale, Apache rates a perfect 10.
http://webmink.com/2011/03/11/is-apache-open-by-rule/
And he gives us a little shout-out :-P
Cheers,
-g
(of course, there is debate on his Open By Rule stuff, but hey... it's
at least *something* to try and measure projects)
On 11.03.2011 20:13, Greg Stein wrote:
> I also don't like to see structures like svn_wc__db_info_t. We had a
> big problem with the entry_t, and things like info_t will continue to
> propagate that broken model. By definition, to use that structure a
> query must be done against both NODES and ACT
2011/3/11 Branko Čibej :
> On 11.03.2011 20:13, Greg Stein wrote:
>> I also don't like to see structures like svn_wc__db_info_t. We had a
>> big problem with the entry_t, and things like info_t will continue to
>> propagate that broken model. By definition, to use that structure a
>> query must be
2011/3/11 Branko Čibej :
> This comment is somewhat orthogonal to the API discussions, but as I've
> noted before ... after my relatively brief sojourn in wc-db, I came to
> the conclusion that having separate NODES and ACTUAL_NODE tables is
> going to be a perpetual impediment to really speeding u
On 12.03.2011 01:29, Greg Stein wrote:
> 2011/3/11 Branko Čibej :
>> This comment is somewhat orthogonal to the API discussions, but as I've
>> noted before ... after my relatively brief sojourn in wc-db, I came to
>> the conclusion that having separate NODES and ACTUAL_NODE tables is
>> going to b
On 12.03.2011 01:11, Mark Phippard wrote:
> I am glad you sent this because I was getting ready to send an email
> to see if anyone is looking into the suggestions you have made here.
> I think we have to get this work done soon. We cannot release with
> performance like it is. How do we define t
2011/3/11 Branko Čibej :
> On 12.03.2011 01:29, Greg Stein wrote:
>...
>> So. Not a premature optimization, but a design choice.
>
> Six of one, half a dozen of the other. ACTUAL is just another op-depth
> with a few extra attributes, so let's compromise and call it an
> implementation choice, rath
2011/3/11 Branko Čibej :
>...
> For the second task, I think the first order of business is to change
> the wc-db tree crawler to do one query instead of zillions, or at least,
> where several queries are required, to do them all in one transaction.
stsp has been working this recently. Killing the
20 matches
Mail list logo
