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

Re: svn commit: rev 4916

From: mark benedetto king <mbk_at_boredom.org>
Date: 2003-02-18 06:29:13 CET

On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 10:33:35PM -0600, Karl Fogel wrote:
>
> Might want to mention issue #1037 in the commit message.
>

Tweaking. Actually, can't tweak:

$ svn propedit svn:log --revprop -r 4916
<do some tweaking, then exit the editor>
subversion/libsvn_ra_dav/util.c:81: (apr_err=175002)
svn: RA layer request failed
svn: applying property change to /repos/svn/!svn/bln/4916: 400 Bad Request

Any idea why?

> > + * Set @a *uuid to the repository's UUID.
> > + */
> > + svn_error_t *(*get_uuid) (void *session_baton,
> > + const char **uuid);
>
> Should probably mention that *uuid has the same lifetime as the
> session_baton.

Yup.

> /* Transmit the last-author. */
> svn_fs_revision_prop (&last_author, fs, committed_rev,
> SVN_PROP_REVISION_AUTHOR, subpool);
> SVN_ERR (change_fn (c, object, SVN_PROP_ENTRY_LAST_AUTHOR,
> last_author, subpool));
>
> /* Transmit the last-author. */
> svn_fs_revision_prop (&last_author, fs, committed_rev,
> SVN_PROP_REVISION_AUTHOR, subpool);
> SVN_ERR (change_fn (c, object, SVN_PROP_ENTRY_UUID,
> last_author, subpool));
>
> Probably didn't mean to do that :-)...
>

Nope.

> Oh, wait -- this was a merge, right? So the question is, is this an
> incorrect merge result, or did merge do the right thing with the data
> it had? (Can you look into it?)
>

No, this wasn't a merge, that was earlier.

> Everything else looks great!
>

Only when compared to my blunders! :-)

--ben

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Feb 18 06:30:04 2003

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