Mark Phippard wrote:
I unlocked the project and committed your patch.
Thank you very much, Mark!
Note that due to the redirect you added, the link for Old Issue Tracker
does not work. Should we just remove that completely? We could also
just make those links go straight to Apache.
IMO, re
I unlocked the project and committed your patch.
Note that due to the redirect you added, the link for Old Issue Tracker
does not work. Should we just remove that completely? We could also just
make those links go straight to Apache.
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Colla
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 16.03.2017 17:18, julianf...@apache.org wrote:
> > Author: julianfoad
> > Date: Thu Mar 16 16:18:18 2017
> > New Revision: 1787216
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1787216&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Clarify the NFS FAQ a little.
>
Branko Čibej wrote on Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 18:10:02 +0100:
> Well in fact it is not fine and we've known that for a while. NFS does
> not guarantee that file renames are atomic, which is a pretty
> fundamental requirement for FSFS. Also file locking in NFS is not
> exactly reliable, whether or not
On 16.03.2017 17:18, julianf...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: julianfoad
> Date: Thu Mar 16 16:18:18 2017
> New Revision: 1787216
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1787216&view=rev
> Log:
> Clarify the NFS FAQ a little.
>
> * faq.html
> (nfs): Clarify by moving FSFS before BDB, adding empha
> -Original Message-
> From: Julian Foad [mailto:jul...@foad.me.uk]
> Sent: vrijdag 10 februari 2017 12:48
> To: Andreas Stieger
> Cc: Branko Čibej ; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: translations (let's use Transifex or Pootle)
>
> > Andreas Stieger wrote:
> >> [Pootle] worked s
Stefan2 et al.:
In svn_ra.h around line 1132, two new-in-1.10 additions, with several
issues with their doc strings.
svn_ra_dirent_receiver_t:
bad @a/@c references: svn_repos_list, path/rel_path, path_info_only
svn_ra_list():
bad @a/@c references: root, authz_read_func, cancel_func, can
Julian Foad wrote on Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 11:50:34 +:
> What sort of testing do you think this needs? A first level could be to test
> that the verification code runs when the option is explicitly enabled and
> doesn't when disabled, and preferably test the default state too. A second
> level c
Stefan2 et al.:
Nodeprops caching is new in 1.10. This caused me to have a look at the
code for enabling it, and I noticed the following in FSFS (and the same
in FSX).
In subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/caching.c@1787000, around line 100:
> /* don't cache text deltas by default.
Wrong: the default
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
should our policy be to provide administrative choice?
A knob sounds good to me [...]
And Bert said "+1" on IRC too.
The attached patch is a basic implementation. The fsfs.conf option is
spelled
[debug]
verify-before-commit = true
I put it under [debug] because t
10 matches
Mail list logo