On Tue, 2011-03-15, Philip Martin wrote:
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1081892&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Make revert change file permissions on the basis of the current magic
> > properties and the current permissions, rather than on any change in
> > the magic permissions. This means file
On Mon, 2011-03-14 at 16:02 +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 04:49:32PM +0530, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
> >
> > >From issue tracker
> > (http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3787)
> >
> > It would be ever-so-helpful to folks looking to capture and replicate a
Julian Foad writes:
> Would I be right in guessing you made this change not from an intent to
> change the behaviour, but because you needed to re-implement part of
> 'revert' for other reasons and this behaviour was the obvious behaviour
> to implement, the old behaviour being the anomaly?
Yes,
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:15:05PM +0530, Arwin Arni wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 March 2011 08:34 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> >I see that '--parents' and '--set-depth' are not allowed in dry-run
> >mode. What is the reason behind that? Is it because they seem to be
> >difficult to implement, or you think
Arwin Arni wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 March 2011 08:34 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-03-02, Arwin Arni wrote:
> >> In my effort to understand the delta editor API, I took it upon myself
> >> to try and implement the --dry-run flag for "svn update".
> >
> >> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Arwin Arni wrote:
> Well, the reason is that both --parents and --set-depth make permanent
> changes to the WC which will not be reported in the output at all.. If the
> user is passing these parameters, he has a fair idea of what these
> "invisible" changes are,
On 03/15/2011 10:15 PM, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
>
> I wonder, why this patch was not considered for fixing issue 3826. I
> could see a fix 1081799 which I see very similar to what I have
> done. Did I miss anything here?
No, I simply overlooked your patch by accident. Of course, that was easy to
C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 03/15/2011 10:15 PM, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
> >
> > I wonder, why this patch was not considered for fixing issue 3826. I
> > could see a fix 1081799 which I see very similar to what I have
> > done. Did I miss anything here?
>
> No, I simply overlooked your patch by
[Begging your pardon for not being able to speak with confident accuracy
about the inner workings of WC-NG.]
Today, while trying to get an overview of the various ways in which
svn_wc__node_walk_children() was used, I found some patterns that seem, to
me at least, to cry out for better database sc
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:59, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>...
> to manage at least the "read" subset of these operations. But I find myself
> wondering if we wouldn't be better served by having a properties table with
> rows for, I dunno: wc_id, local_relpath, property_name, property_value.
>...
On 03/16/2011 01:17 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:59, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> ...
>> to manage at least the "read" subset of these operations. But I find myself
>> wondering if we wouldn't be better served by having a properties table with
>> rows for, I dunno: wc_id, lo
Arwin Arni wrote:
On Tuesday 15 March 2011 08:34 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-02, Arwin Arni wrote:
In my effort to understand the delta editor API, I took it upon myself
to try and implement the --dry-run flag for "svn update".
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2491
12 matches
Mail list logo
