Stefan Kueng writes:
> Using svn 1.13.0 on Windows:
>
> SUBST G:\ D:\Development\TestWC
> G:
> svn st .
>
> ! .
> ? Foo
> ? src\nonversioned
>
> As you can see, the root folder doesn't show the correct status.
> This showed the correct status with 1.12.x.
On my side, this issue
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Can't we just do this? —
def recommended_release(version_being_rolled, versions_on_dist_release):
stable_versions_on_dist_release = filter(lambda v: not
v.is_prerelease(), versions_on_dist_release)
if version_being_rolled.is_prerelease():
ret
On 19.11.2019 19:19, Stefan Kueng wrote:
> Using svn 1.13.0 on Windows:
>
> SUBST G:\ D:\Development\TestWC
> G:
> svn st .
>
> ! .
> ? Foo
> ? src\nonversioned
>
> As you can see, the root folder doesn't show the correct status.
> This showed the correct status with 1.12.x.
See
Nathan Hartman wrote on Tue, 19 Nov 2019 18:25 +00:00:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 12:04 PM Daniel Shahaf
> wrote:
> > The concept of having the binary know the `svnversion` info of the
> > working copy it was built from does make sense, however. We could make
> > gen-make.py add «-DFOO=`svnversi
On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 12:04 PM Daniel Shahaf
wrote:
> Nathan Hartman wrote on Tue, 19 Nov 2019 04:53 +00:00:
> > Moving this from users@ to dev@...
>
> [Aside: when doing this, it's a good to post a short response on users@
> saying the conversation continues on dev@, for anyone who wants to
>
Using svn 1.13.0 on Windows:
SUBST G:\ D:\Development\TestWC
G:
svn st .
! .
? Foo
? src\nonversioned
As you can see, the root folder doesn't show the correct status.
This showed the correct status with 1.12.x.
Stefan
Julian Foad wrote on Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 17:18:23 +:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > julianf...@apache.org wrote on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:31 +00:00:
> > > Author: julianfoad
> > > Date: Mon Nov 18 16:31:45 2019
> > > New Revision: 1869981
> > >
> > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1869981&vie
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
julianf...@apache.org wrote on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:31 +00:00:
Author: julianfoad
Date: Mon Nov 18 16:31:45 2019
New Revision: 1869981
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1869981&view=rev
Log:
* tools/dist/release.py (recommended_release): Remove TODO: didn't make sense.
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
julianf...@apache.org wrote on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 17:00 +00:00:
+++ subversion/trunk/tools/dist/release.py Mon Nov 18 17:00:16 2019
@@ -70,43 +71,22 @@ except ImportError:
+# Read the dist metadata (about release lines)
+with open(get_dist_metadata_file_path(), 'r') as stream:
julianf...@apache.org wrote on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 17:00 +00:00:
> +++ subversion/trunk/tools/dist/release.py Mon Nov 18 17:00:16 2019
> @@ -70,43 +71,22 @@ except ImportError:
> +# Read the dist metadata (about release lines)
> +with open(get_dist_metadata_file_path(), 'r') as stream:
> +dist_met
julianf...@apache.org wrote on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:31 +00:00:
> Author: julianfoad
> Date: Mon Nov 18 16:31:45 2019
> New Revision: 1869981
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1869981&view=rev
> Log:
> * tools/dist/release.py (recommended_release): Remove TODO: didn't make sense.
The point
Nathan Hartman wrote on Tue, 19 Nov 2019 04:53 +00:00:
> Moving this from users@ to dev@...
[Aside: when doing this, it's a good to post a short response on users@
saying the conversation continues on dev@, for anyone who wants to
follow along but isn't subscribed to both lists.]
> On a somewhat
Nathan Hartman wrote on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 15:30 +00:00:
> [[[
>
> You need the Berkeley DB libraries only if you are building a
> Subversion server that supports the older BDB repository storage back-
> end, or a Subversion client that can access local BDB repositories via
> the file:// URI scheme.
Nathan Hartman wrote on Mon, 18 Nov 2019 15:46 +00:00:
> The only problem with this idea is that the link won't take the reader
> directly to the information about Python. INSTALL contains a lot of
> other information to wade through.
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/tags/1.13.0/INSTALL?re
14 matches
Mail list logo
