On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:20:16PM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote on Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 22:36:39 +:
> > Stefan Sperling wrote on Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 23:22:22 +0200:
> > > Reading our openhub stats for fun I noticed that the stats
> > > are totally screwed. It seems they st
On 10/17/2016 15:37, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 17.10.2016 14:12, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> Johan Corveleyn wrote on Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:18:35 +0200:
>>> Omitting the '=' also doesn't cut it:
>>>
>>> [[[
>>> C:\autoprops\wc\trunk\dir>svn pg svn:auto-props --show-inherited-props
>>> C:\autoprops\wc
Just a quick heads up since I didn't get to reply to this one yet:
Thanks for your review, Evgeny.
On 10/14/2016 6:24 PM, Evgeny Kotkov wrote:
Stefan Hett writes:
if (option == NULL)
-return svn_error_createf(SVN_ERR_CLIENT_CONFLICT_OPTION_NOT_APPLICABLE,
-
On 10/14/2016 8:53 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Stefan wrote on Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 17:30:57 +0200:
Add an XFail test for issue #4642 (Setting depth to exclude for a path
containing unversioned files requires a cleanup afterwards).
Looks good overall. Just a few minor questions:
+def fold_tree_
On 18.10.2016 09:32, Stefan wrote:
> On 10/17/2016 15:37, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> On 17.10.2016 14:12, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>> Johan Corveleyn wrote on Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:18:35 +0200:
Omitting the '=' also doesn't cut it:
[[[
C:\autoprops\wc\trunk\dir>svn pg svn:auto-props
On 10/18/2016 12:06 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
On 18.10.2016 09:32, Stefan wrote:
On 10/17/2016 15:37, Branko Čibej wrote:
On 17.10.2016 14:12, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Johan Corveleyn wrote on Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:18:35 +0200:
Omitting the '=' also doesn't cut it:
[[[
C:\autoprops\wc\trunk\dir>
Stefan Hett wrote on Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:56:29 +0200:
> Thanks for the review Daniel. Just a quick heads up that I'll get back to
> this asap. Might take a few days until I can free up some time though.
Thanks for coordinating our expectations.
Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:06:32 +0200:
> On 18.10.2016 09:32, Stefan wrote:
> > On 10/17/2016 15:37, Branko Čibej wrote:
> >> On 17.10.2016 14:12, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >>> Johan Corveleyn wrote on Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:18:35 +0200:
> Omitting the '=' also doesn't cut it
On 10/18/2016 12:29 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:06:32 +0200:
On 18.10.2016 09:32, Stefan wrote:
On 10/17/2016 15:37, Branko Čibej wrote:
On 17.10.2016 14:12, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Johan Corveleyn wrote on Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:18:35 +0200:
Omitting
On 18.10.2016 12:29, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:06:32 +0200:
>> If we change the behaviour so that a rule for a (case-insensitive)
>> pattern completely overrides a hierarchically previoius rule, we can
>> also introduce the concept of disabling auto-props
Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 13:08:37 +0200:
> It is. I don't think there's any way we can /not/ make it backwards
> incompatible, given the current implementation. Which is why I think we
> should just admit that current behaviour is a bug.
>
> Either that, or introduce a new proper
Hi,
finally got around to update my patch regarding checkouts to
existing directories. The semantics have been changed to accept
checkouts iff
- the target directory does not exist
- the target directory is empty
- the repository to check out is empty
- the --force flag is given
This should trea
Hi everyone,
Our last Subversion 1.9.4 release happened about six months ago, and we
have several important fixes waiting to be released.
I plan to roll 1.9.5 this Thursday, on October 20th. So please wrap up
any nomination/voting for things that you'd like included.
>> Any reason why we might
On 10/18/16 16:38, Branko Čibej wrote:
On 18.10.2016 12:29, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:06:32 +0200:
If we change the behaviour so that a rule for a (case-insensitive)
pattern completely overrides a hierarchically previoius rule, we can
also introduce the
On 18.10.2016 18:46, Martin Edgar Furter Rathod wrote:
> On 10/18/16 16:38, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> On 18.10.2016 12:29, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>> Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:06:32 +0200:
If we change the behaviour so that a rule for a (case-insensitive)
pattern completely
On 18.10.2016 19:10, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 18.10.2016 18:46, Martin Edgar Furter Rathod wrote:
>> On 10/18/16 16:38, Branko Čibej wrote:
>>> On 18.10.2016 12:29, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:06:32 +0200:
> If we change the behaviour so that a rule f
On 18.10.2016 16:38, Evgeny Kotkov wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Our last Subversion 1.9.4 release happened about six months ago, and we
> have several important fixes waiting to be released.
>
> I plan to roll 1.9.5 this Thursday, on October 20th. So please wrap up
> any nomination/voting for things
Hi,
Some time ago, in a separate email thread I was asked to try 1.10
client. I have been using it since, and today it showed an error during
merge:
Checking r12300... done
Tree conflict on '':
Directory merged from
'^/trunk/@12172'
to
'^/trunk/@12414'
was deleted by in r12300.
A directory w
On 10/18/2016 01:38 PM, Alexey Neyman wrote:
Hi,
Some time ago, in a separate email thread I was asked to try 1.10
client. I have been using it since, and today it showed an error
during merge:
Checking r12300... done
Tree conflict on '':
Directory merged from
'^/trunk/@12172'
to
'^/trunk/@1
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Branko Čibej wrote on Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 13:08:37 +0200:
>> It is. I don't think there's any way we can /not/ make it backwards
>> incompatible, given the current implementation. Which is why I think we
>> should just admit that current beh
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:42:40PM -0700, Alexey Neyman wrote:
> I just found what made it consider this directory different: it had build
> artifacts (*.o, *.d, etc) in that directory - once I ran 'make clean' prior
> to merge, the merge proceeded smoothly. Does the client consider unversioned
> f
On 10/18/2016 02:02 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:42:40PM -0700, Alexey Neyman wrote:
I just found what made it consider this directory different: it had build
artifacts (*.o, *.d, etc) in that directory - once I ran 'make clean' prior
to merge, the merge proceeded smooth
22 matches
Mail list logo
