On 27.02.2015 23:44, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Branko Čibej [mailto:brane_at_wandisco.com]
>> Sent: vrijdag 27 februari 2015 21:05
>> To: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
>>
>> On 24.02.2015 21:49, Bert Huijben wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ben Reser [mailto:ben_at_reser.org]
>>>> Sent: dinsdag 24 februari 2015 18:53
>>>> To: Subversion Development
>>>> Subject: Catchup merge of trunk onto 1.9 branch?
>>>>
>>>> I know that Bert has made a lot of changes he'd like to include in 1.9 on
>>>> trunk. At this point since we haven't cut a release candidate I'd like to
>>>> propose that we just do a catchup merge excluding anything we really don't
>>>> want. I believe at this point that would just be the version bumpage.
>>> +1
>>>
>>> I hadn't expect this much agreement, or I wouldn't have spent the day cutting
>> the changes into backport suggestions. Luckily that is a good way to review your
>> own changes...
>>
>> Bert, I think we're more or less waiting for you to say you're ready to
>> do the catch-up merge.
> I don't expect any really big things to happen soon. (Or I must find something serious again :( )
>
> That status didn't support some tree conflicts is a really nasty problem, that also affects 1.8.x.
> (And as our conflict resolver and commit both use status as their source, we just forgot to update moves and nobody noticed)
>
> I found some cases where 'svn delete' overly aggressive removes all conflicts (even from layers unaffected by the delete), but I don't think we have to wait for that.
I interpret that as "+1" and did the catch-up merge in r1662916.
1.9.x is now closed for backports except release blockers until we roll
the Beta.
-- Brane
Received on 2015-02-28 11:40:03 CET