Re: Neon test failures explained.

C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> I think I've *finally* determined that the remaining Neon test failures are,
> once again, related to wcprops. But this time, it's not the new wcprops
> code that really takes the blame here.

$ svn blame subversion/libsvn_ra_neon/commit.c
[...]
   492 kfogel static svn_error_t * commit_open_root(void *edit_baton,
  1396 gstein svn_revnum_t
base_revision,
  1396 gstein apr_pool_t *dir_pool,
   492 kfogel void **root_baton)
     1 svn {
     1 svn commit_ctx_t *cc = edit_baton;
     1 svn resource_baton_t *root;
 17262 dionisos version_rsrc_t *rsrc;
     1 svn
  7371 cmpilato /* create the root resource. no wr_url (yet). */
  7371 cmpilato rsrc = apr_pcalloc(dir_pool, sizeof(*rsrc));
  7371 cmpilato rsrc->pool = dir_pool;
  1863 gstein
  1863 gstein /* ### should this be 'base_revision' here? we might not
always be
  1863 gstein ### working against the head! (think "properties"). */
  1863 gstein rsrc->revision = SVN_INVALID_REVNUM;

Methinks, Greg, that the answer is "yes". And thanks to wcprops, methinks
we've been able to avoid doing the right thing here for **YEARS**.

Testing that theory now.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2273657