Re: Slowing code churn in libsvn_wc

Philip Martin <philip@codematters.co.uk> writes:
> Perhaps we should revert 2470 as it introduces a regression. The
> second commit in the following sequence

Yeah, that's one of the options on the table. Especially given your
recent comments in issue #792, we can't be certain that we fully
understand the cause of the Kevin's original commit bug either, except
that it appeared between 2452/2470 and 2504.

(So if we revert 2470, would we also then revert 2452, do you think?
I kind of think we should. It feels odd to leave the half-started
change in the code; better if all this stuff were cleanly restarted
after Alpha, instead of awkwardly bridging the release.)

Anyway, let's wait a bit on making this call. Ben is reproducing the
regression right now and taking a look, we'll come back with more
formal proposal for action in a bit.

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jul 15 17:30:51 2002