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

Re: request for backporting to 1.1.x

From: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: 2004-09-06 21:10:19 CEST

On Mon, 2004-09-06 at 13:12, SteveKing wrote:
> Hi,
> Issue 2016 has been fixed in revisions 10788 and 10796. I'd really want
> this backported to the 1.1.x branch, even if it's not activated in the
> command line client. That would save me from merging those two revisions
> every time I build TortoiseSVN, and if it's not activated in the command
> line client it wouldn't even be used by it. So the "danger" of
> backporting tends against null.

I found some substantial problems with r10788 in my review, so I can't
nominate it yet. But I agree that we must fix this problem before
releasing 1.1. It's dangerous to release a 1.x release with performance
or functionality regressions which might dissuade people from upgrading
from 1.(x-1).

(Also, how did you imagine that r10788 would pose no risk to the client
if we don't activate svn_utf_initialize()? How would
svn_utf_initialize() do any good if we didn't change the code path of
actual translation functions? As it turns out, it looks like we might
experience significant performance degradation if we don't call

> Also, on a different subject: the crash in 'svn st -u' I reported for
> the fourth time here:

I took the ten minutes to figure out what was going on here and checked
in a fix (r10841). I'll nominate it for 1.1.

Of course, it's also a big problem that we don't have enough safety
checks in "svn switch --relocate".

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Sep 6 21:10:51 2004

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.