[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Next 1.6 release?

From: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <Arfrever.FTA_at_GMail.Com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 18:28:27 +0100

2009-11-06 08:41:05 Greg Stein napisaƂ(a):
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:45, Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org> wrote:
> > On Nov 4, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> >
> >> kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com wrote:
> >>> I'd like to be a little selfish and wonder if it would be useful to
> >>> release a
> >>> 1.6.7 version faster than normal. (Especially since the release
> >>> schedule
> >>> may be affected by the amount of holiday time near the end of the
> >>> year.)
> >>>
> >>> We are really getting hurt by the external problems that were fixed
> >>> in r40152
> >>> and merged into 1.6.x in r40219. Without this change we can't move
> >>> a large
> >>> number of our users from 1.5, and I would rather not be forced to
> >>> compile
> >>> custom patched versions for all the clients we use.
> >>> (command line x 4 platforms, TortoiseSVN, Subclipse)
> >>>
> >>> Looking at STATUS, there are some other things already nominated
> >>> (but need
> >>> votes!!!) that also seem useful:
> >>>
> >>> * Fix for #3432
> >>> * Win 7 exception handler support
> >>> * Fix for #3489
> >>> * Win32 performance improvements
> >>> * future-proof patch
> >>> * Fix for #3519
> >>
> >> For those who don't have a numerically-keyed hash of issues in their
> >> brain:
> >>
> >> * Fix for #3432:
> >> "Merge can record mergeinfo from natural history gaps"
> >>
> >> * Fix for #3489:
> >> "Filenames with @ cannot be committed to the repository unless an @
> >> is
> >> added at the end."
> >>
> >> * future-proof patch
> >> "Make 1.6.7 (and subsequent Subversion releases) recognize Subversion
> >> 1.7+ working copies."
> >>
> >> * Fix for #3519:
> >> "ra_serf using Label header unsupported by mod_dav_svn"
> >>
> >>
> >>> I don't see it nominated, but the svn+ssh changes for windows may
> >>> also
> >>> fix some server resource problems others were seeing (We don't use
> >>> svn+ssh,
> >>> so I can't comment.)
> >>>
> >>> Is it too soon to be talking about this?
> >>
> >> +1 to the general notion of getting a 1.6.7 release out as soon as we
> >> have some useful fixes in it.
> >
> > I've not yet looked at the the stuff that's currently been merged for
> > 1.6.7, but there are several items in STATUS that are worth a
> > release. I'm hesitant to do one *too* quickly (<4 weeks), but I'm
> > happy to cut a release in the next few weeks if the demand is there,
> > and it sounds like it is.
> >
> > As usual, the roadblock for getting stuff into the release is the
> > review needed in STATUS. Please take some time to take a look.
>
> In the Apache Incubator, there has been a request for us to produce a
> release. I'm going to point them at the 1.6.7 release process, so I'd
> like to request that it starts in (say) a couple weeks.

Change of license probably needs to be backported.

-- 
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2415156
Received on 2009-11-06 18:26:06 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.