On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Hyrum K Wright
wrote:
> In following this discussion, I'd like to point out that while this
> seems like an interesting problem, it doesn't feel like a showstopper
> for 1.7.1. In other words, I'd like to ship 1.7.1 with our existing
> high-impact fixes, rather t
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Mark Phippard [mailto:markp...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: woensdag 19 oktober 2011 15:30
>> To: Hyrum K Wright
>> Cc: Bert Huijben; dev@subversion.apache.org
>&g
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Phippard [mailto:markp...@gmail.com]
> Sent: woensdag 19 oktober 2011 15:30
> To: Hyrum K Wright
> Cc: Bert Huijben; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 1.7.1 soon - Please review
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Mark P
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:00 AM, Hyrum K Wright
> wrote:
>
>>> * r1181609: Fixes a major regression for our api-users that perform a 'svn
>>> status -U' .
>>
>> This was merged to 1.7.x in r1185955.
>
> FWIW, in Subclipse we are seeing anot
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:00 AM, Hyrum K Wright
wrote:
>> * r1181609: Fixes a major regression for our api-users that perform a 'svn
>> status -U' .
>
> This was merged to 1.7.x in r1185955.
FWIW, in Subclipse we are seeing another one of these, When there is
an incoming delete from the reposi
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Bert Huijben wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With the current stream of user reports of a few specific upgrade problems
> Hyrum intends to cut a Subversion 1.7.1 soon.
>
> I would like to see the following patches that are in STATUS to go in, but
> they need more votes:
>
Hi,
With the current stream of user reports of a few specific upgrade problems
Hyrum intends to cut a Subversion 1.7.1 soon.
I would like to see the following patches that are in STATUS to go in, but
they need more votes:
* r1185242: Trivial patch that resolves a common concurrency probl
7 matches
Mail list logo
