On 17.07.2012 03:36, Greg Stein wrote:
On Jul 16, 2012 1:45 AM, "Rainer Jung" mailto:rainer.j...@kippdata.de>> wrote:
>...
> Now: Daniel changed something w.r.t. my LDAP groups at around 20:18.
The first attempt after that was still not successful, but maybe it took
a few seconds to propagate
On 7/17/12 1:14 AM, "Trent Nelson" wrote:
> 7. Once we detect a root is affected, evn:roots is updated
>accordingly. In trac@r175, a new tag is created. Specifically,
>trunk@175 is copied to /tags/trac-0.5-rc1. That results in two
^
s/trunk@175/trunk@174
On 7/16/12 8:57 PM, "Johan Corveleyn" wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:33 PM, C. Michael Pilato
>wrote:
>> On 07/16/2012 08:11 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>>> As we couldn't think of a usage of the content I would suggest that we
>>>just
>>> always set the property to '*', just like how we handle
On Jul 16, 2012 1:18 PM, "Branko Čibej" wrote:
>...
> Please describe the set of use cases you want to address, propose how
> you think this new property can solve them, and at the very least,
> explain how the solution will affect: a) the command-line client, b)
> every other client, c) branching
On Jul 16, 2012 1:45 AM, "Rainer Jung" wrote:
>...
> Now: Daniel changed something w.r.t. my LDAP groups at around 20:18. The
first attempt after that was still not successful, but maybe it took a few
seconds to propagate or something. So I'd say we close this issue.
I'd be curious what that LDAP
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:33 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 07/16/2012 08:11 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> On the Berlin hackathon the suggestion was raised that it might help that we
>> standardize a new 'svn:branch' property to give tooling a hint on what
>> directories are branches and which ar
> -Original Message-
> From: C. Michael Pilato [mailto:cmpil...@collab.net]
> Sent: maandag 16 juli 2012 17:18
> To: Bert Huijben; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: Standardizing a 'svn:branch' (boolean) property
>
> On 07/16/2012 09:41 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Mon,
> -Original Message-
> From: C. Michael Pilato [mailto:cmpil...@collab.net]
> Sent: maandag 16 juli 2012 21:52
> To: Daniel Shahaf
> Cc: Bert Huijben; 'Branko Čibej'; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: Standardizing a 'svn:branch' (boolean) property
>
> On 07/16/2012 03:41 PM,
On 16.07.2012 19:51, Bert Huijben wrote:
> I'm not saying directories aren't branches. I'm just suggesting that
> we give tools a hint to what directories are used as branches.
I said that directories /aren't/ branches. :)
> And I'm not alone in this wish. Subclipse and at least one other client
On 07/16/2012 03:41 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Bert Huijben wrote on Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 19:51:59 +0200:
>> A simple question this 'might' help answer is:
>>
>> I have a project file ^/trunk/src/Ankh.Package/Ankh.Package.csproj, which my
>> user wants to check out. Which directory level should we
Bert Huijben wrote on Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 19:51:59 +0200:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Branko Čibej [mailto:br...@wandisco.com]
> > Sent: maandag 16 juli 2012 19:08
> > To: dev@subversion.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: RFC: Standardizing a 'svn:branch' (boolean) property
> >
> > On
[Philip Martin]
> There needs to be a way to create the initial branch, i.e. mkdir as well
> as copy.
In fact, that's really _all_ that should be needed. If your 'trunk'
has a svn:branch property, and you copy or tag it with 'svn copy', the
target will get the same property. An explicit 'svn co
Hello All,
I'm glad to report that SubGit 1.0 RC1 is available for download at
http://subgit.com/
SubGit is a server side tool that enables transparent two-way
synchronization between Subversion and Git.
Being installed into Subversion repository, SubGit provides safe and
smooth Svn to Git migrat
> -Original Message-
> From: Branko Čibej [mailto:br...@wandisco.com]
> Sent: maandag 16 juli 2012 19:08
> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: Standardizing a 'svn:branch' (boolean) property
>
> On 16.07.2012 14:11, Bert Huijben wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On the Berlin hack
On Jul 16, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Trent Nelson wrote on Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 08:58:09 -0700:
>> Somewhat related: is this a FreeBSD box?
>
> Yes, it's eris from http://www.apache.org/dev/machines.
>
>> ports/sysutils/mcelog is useful for getting info on any ECC errors
>> that
On 16.07.2012 14:11, Bert Huijben wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On the Berlin hackathon the suggestion was raised that it might help that we
> standardize a new 'svn:branch' property to give tooling a hint on what
> directories are branches and which aren't. To make sure we don't forget
> about this idea
Trent Nelson wrote on Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 08:58:09 -0700:
> Somewhat related: is this a FreeBSD box?
Yes, it's eris from http://www.apache.org/dev/machines.
> ports/sysutils/mcelog is useful for getting info on any ECC errors
> that might have occurred.
Thanks for the pointer. The port descrip
On Jul 16, 2012, at 11:17 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 07/16/2012 09:41 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:11:10PM +0200, Bert Huijben wrote:
>>> Open questions:
>>> * 'svn:branch' or maybe 'svn:root'?
>>
>> I'd prefer svn:branch but I don't care strongly.
>
> And I "
On Jul 16, 2012, at 8:11 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On the Berlin hackathon the suggestion was raised that it might help that we
> standardize a new 'svn:branch' property to give tooling a hint on what
> directories are branches and which aren't.
Automatic branch ("root") identific
On Jul 15, 2012, at 9:32 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote on Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 09:46:55 +0100:
>> Pending rmuir@'s feedback, then, I'll go ahead and edit the revision
>> file in-place. No change should be needed to any of the svn mirrors.
>
> I have now made the following edit:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:17:58AM -0400, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 07/16/2012 09:41 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > I would favour a new 'svn branch' subcommand which is equivalent
> > to 'svn copy' including a prop-add of 'svn:branch' at the copy target.
>
> Hrm. Here's where I think we see
On 07/16/2012 09:41 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:11:10PM +0200, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> Open questions:
>> * 'svn:branch' or maybe 'svn:root'?
>
> I'd prefer svn:branch but I don't care strongly.
And I "svn:branch-root".
>> * Which UI do/should we provide in 'svn'
>> sv
Stefan Sperling writes:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:11:10PM +0200, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> Open questions:
>> * 'svn:branch' or maybe 'svn:root'?
>
> I'd prefer svn:branch but I don't care strongly.
>
>> * Which UI do/should we provide in 'svn'
>> svn cp --branch URL
>> Performs a copy and makes
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@elego.de]
> Sent: maandag 16 juli 2012 15:42
> To: Bert Huijben
> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: Standardizing a 'svn:branch' (boolean) property
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:11:10PM +0200, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:11:10PM +0200, Bert Huijben wrote:
> Open questions:
> * 'svn:branch' or maybe 'svn:root'?
I'd prefer svn:branch but I don't care strongly.
> * Which UI do/should we provide in 'svn'
> svn cp --branch URL
> Performs a copy and makes sure there is a svn:branch property
On 07/16/2012 08:11 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
> On the Berlin hackathon the suggestion was raised that it might help that we
> standardize a new 'svn:branch' property to give tooling a hint on what
> directories are branches and which aren't. To make sure we don't forget
> about this idea I just drop
Hi,
On the Berlin hackathon the suggestion was raised that it might help that we
standardize a new 'svn:branch' property to give tooling a hint on what
directories are branches and which aren't. To make sure we don't forget
about this idea I just drop this on the list with the information
Rainer Jung wrote on Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:44:54 +0200:
> Now: Daniel changed something w.r.t. my LDAP groups at around 20:18.
> The first attempt after that was still not successful, but maybe it
> took a few seconds to propagate or something. So I'd say we close
> this issue.
>
> Sorry for the
On 16.07.2012 00:56, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Bert Huijben wrote on Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 23:40:36 +0200:
-Original Message-
From: Rainer Jung [mailto:rainer.j...@kippdata.de]
Sent: zondag 15 juli 2012 22:58
To: Subversion Development
Subject: Problem report: commit failed with E195023: Ch
29 matches
Mail list logo
