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

Re: svn commit: r1071330 - in /subversion/branches/1.6.x: ./ subversion/tests/ subversion/tests/cmdline/ subversion/tests/cmdline/svntest/ subversion/tests/libsvn_fs/ subversion/tests/libsvn_fs_base/ subversion/tests/libsvn_fs_fs/ subversion/tests/libsvn_r...

From: Blair Zajac <blair_at_orcaware.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:04:23 -0800

On 02/16/2011 10:02 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 05:58:00PM -0000, hwright_at_apache.org wrote:
>> Author: hwright
>> Date: Wed Feb 16 17:58:00 2011
>> New Revision: 1071330
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1071330&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Merge r1051744, r1051745, r1053185, r1053241 from trunk, using the instructions
>
>> Notes:
>> Merge all the changes on the 1.6.x-r1051744 branch and then merge
>> r1051745.
>
> Blair,
>
> just FYI, I nearly missed r1051745 during review because I was assuming that
> the backport branch contained the complete diff. I think it's a good
> idea to merge all relevant changes into the brackport branch if one exists.
>
> Stefan

Hey Stefan,

Sure, I could do that.

I wanted each commit separately reviewable, instead of reviewing some
monster backport branch, so this made it easier to review. Not that
r1051745 was a large commit in of itself. But it looks like it didn't
work that well :)

Blair
Received on 2011-02-16 21:05:28 CET

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