Vincent Batts writes:
> On 19/12/11 10:04 +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>Please send separate patches for separate functional changes. Getting
>>the tests to pass with ruby1.8 would be a separate functional change than
>>supporting ruby1.9.
>
> Okay after a bit of familiarizing myself with the sv
Philip Martin writes:
> Vincent Batts writes:
>
>> On 19/12/11 10:04 +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>>Please send separate patches for separate functional changes. Getting
>>>the tests to pass with ruby1.8 would be a separate functional change than
>>>supporting ruby1.9.
>>
>> Okay after a bit of
Philip Martin writes:
>> from :29:in `require'
>> from
>> /home/pm/sw/subversion/src2/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test-unit-ext/always-show-result.rb:20:in
>> `'
>> from :29:in `require'
>> from :29:in `require'
>> from
>> /home/pm/sw/subversion/s
Philip Martin writes:
> The line is:
>
>require "test/unit/ui/testrunnermediator"
>
> ruby-1.8 works because testrunnermediator.rb is part of libruby1.8 on my
> machine, it does not appear to be part of the standard ruby-1.9.1
> install.
So I can install a gem:
export GEM_HOME=$HOME/.rubyge
On 01/25/2012 09:51 AM, vijay wrote:
> Index: subversion/include/svn_repos.h
> ===
> --- subversion/include/svn_repos.h(revision 1235706)
> +++ subversion/include/svn_repos.h(working copy)
> @@ -2649,7 +2649,7 @@
> /**
> * S
Branko Čibej wrote on Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 06:55:29 +0100:
> On 25.01.2012 22:11, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Using tools/dist/backport.pl, I can fully process 3-4 approved
>
> - Rewriting it in a programming language that's not write-only? :-P
Fair point --- I'm the first to admit the choice of lan
phi...@apache.org writes:
> Author: philip
> Date: Thu Jan 26 16:41:52 2012
> New Revision: 1236283
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1236283&view=rev
> Log:
> Try to get errno before it changes.
>
> * subversion/libsvn_ra_svn/cyrus_auth.c
> (get_sasl_errno_msg): Document usage.
> (get
On 26.01.2012 15:56, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Branko Čibej wrote on Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 06:55:29 +0100:
>> On 25.01.2012 22:11, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>> Using tools/dist/backport.pl, I can fully process 3-4 approved
>> - Rewriting it in a programming language that's not write-only? :-P
> Fair point
Branko Čibej wrote on Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 18:19:08 +0100:
> On 26.01.2012 15:56, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Branko Čibej wrote on Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 06:55:29 +0100:
> >> On 25.01.2012 22:11, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >>> Using tools/dist/backport.pl, I can fully process 3-4 approved
> >> - Rewriting
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:57 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 01/21/2012 09:05 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 03:23, Paul Burba wrote:
>>> Yeah, I've been thinking about this. As you say, the solution for our
>>> "own" inheritable properties is simple. Since Subversion alrea
Paul Burba wrote on Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 16:55:48 -0500:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:57 PM, C. Michael Pilato
> wrote:
> > I must have blanked out through the sequence of emails that got us from
> > "let's solve a couple of oft-reported user issues regarding auto-props and
> > ignores" to "let's
On 01/26/2012 06:44 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
Vijay, I think you have misunderstood what these docstrings are claiming.
They are not saying, "When Subversion calls the FS-loading API, it tends to
pass FALSE for validate_props by default."
They are describing the quite literal implementation
12 matches
Mail list logo
