Request to pick up fix with revision 1683266 (swig perl typemap update) with next subversion release

2016-06-30 Thread Ioannis Kappas
Hello, Can you please kindly consider picking up the fix with revision 1683266 (http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1683266) in the next patch/official subversion release? It fixes a long standing issue in the subversion Perl bindings, whereby a client stressing the interface

Re: Request to pick up fix with revision 1683266 (swig perl typemap update) with next subversion release

2016-06-30 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:21:30AM +, Ioannis Kappas wrote: > Hello, > > Can you please kindly consider picking up the fix with revision 1683266 > (http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1683266) in the > next patch/official subversion release? It has been nominated for 1.9.5.

Re: Request to pick up fix with revision 1683266 (swig perl typemap update) with next subversion release

2016-06-30 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Stefan Sperling wrote on Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 22:26:31 +0200: > It just needs one more vote from a committer to make it in, > and no vetoes. It needs no more votes: bindings changes require one +1 and one +0, and r1683266 has that. You can move the change to the "Approved" section. This means r1

pack and rsync Re: Creating and Verifying a Reliable backup

2016-06-30 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Andrew Reedick wrote on Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 20:00:02 +: > However, I'm not sure what the pros/cons of packing are in regards to rsync. Packing a repository moves revision data from the existing files to new files: it basically concatenates each 1000 revision files into a single file. I think