Re: r17214, JavaHL thread local storeage and reentrant calls

On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 03:23:47PM -0800, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> > Out of interest, does dlr's -0 act as a veto, or is the change approved
> > regardless? (I'd still prefer we didn't merge it until everyone's happy,
> > of course, but I just wonder what it means in practice).
>
> A -0 does not block the merge.
>

Thanks. (HACKING doesn't actually define what a -0 means, or whether
it's a veto.)

In which case, I'll wait until later tomorrow to see if anyone has any
objections, then merge it into the 1.3 branch. As I understand it,
a change exclusively under bindings (like this one) only requires a
single +1 to merge.

Regards,
Malcolm

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Nov 15 00:31:46 2005