Hi Stefan,
Stefan Fuhrmann writes:
> >I enabled it, but there's still some issue:
> >subversion/svnadmin/main.c:1892: undefined reference to `svn_fs_get_cache_config'
> >
> It builds here. Did you run autogen.sh before ./configure?
Yep, I did. I tried it several times again; same issue. Is the
build.conf broken?
> >>For the MD5 stuff, try r986459 (performance branch).
> >>It should eliminate 1 of the 3 MD5 calculations.
> >Why doesn't STATUS document this and everything else consistently?
> >
> Because there is no simple mapping rev->feature / improvement.
> In particular, there are a number of intermediate steps that were
> replaced by new code later on. There is no point in reviewing
> these earlier revisions but the newer ones can't be reviewed and
> merged on their own. Hence the integration branch for the first
> major change.
Ah, I saw that.
> As soon as a larger number of patches got reviewed and merged,
> I will prepare further changes for integration. So far, nobody had
> free cycles to do the reviews.
I'm being stretched really thin myself- I sometimes have to sacrifice
several hours of sleep to keep up :| I'll try my best but I can't
promise. Also, there's the additional overhead of having to wait for
approvals- if I can't pull it off, I'll request a full committer to
take over.
> >I had the chance to check them out and apply them just now. They work
> >as expected. I'll submit some (uneducated) patch reviews to the list
> >and request a merge. I don't have access to the areas your patches
> >touch.
> I really appreciate that. It would be great if someone had the time
> to review the 3 commits to the membuffer cache integration branch.
> The review should not require too much context knowledge. An
> in-depth review will take a full day or so (like for an average sized
> C++ class).
Thanks for the estimate- Instead of jumping between classes and
attempting to review it bit-by-bit, I'll try to allocate a Saturday or
Sunday to this task.
-- Ram
Received on 2010-10-04 17:00:25 CEST