On 02/09/2012 05:22 AM, Philip Martin wrote:
> Hyrum K Wright <hyrum.wright_at_wandisco.com> writes:
>> Is there any sense of closure on the serf+windows test failure on the
>> 1.7.x branch? My sense is that the failure does *not* expose a new
>> bug on the branch, but rather smokes out an existing one.
> That's my view as well. svnrdump has a bug that causes it to rely on
> the server responding to serf's series HTTP requests in a particular
> order. It's not a new bug.
Has that actually been established? I mean, if all svnrdump is doing is
expecting ra_serf to honor the well-established, well-documented, but
ra_serf-flaunting Ev1 editor drive ordering rules ... is that really
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on 2012-02-09 17:14:44 CET
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev