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

Re: Releasing 1.0.10, 1.1.5, 1.2.4 and 1.3.3

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2007-04-05 19:56:55 CEST

C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> On 4/5/07, Michael Sinz <Michael.Sinz@sinz.org> wrote:
>>> Having said that - being that Subversion is version control,
>>> I would hope that we could at least show that we can maintain
>>> older branches with the system - it may just be a bit harder to
>>> get enough people to spend the time to test/sign the archive.
>> Asking folks to sign and test *four* releases for a non-problem for
>> 99% of the world is a waste of time. IF this impacted clients, then
>> maybe I could justify the effort - but not for when it's server-side
>> only and only impacts those who use BDB (which hasn't been the default
>> in ages). -- justin
> The bug is not limited to BDB, Justin. *Both* backends see the directory
> property changes disappear without user-visible record ('svn log' won't show
> it... not sure how it affects 'svnadmin dump'). It's just the BDB backend
> as the *additional* problem of the delta chain cycle.

And since I'm already pointing out the facts, I'll remind you that the
degree to which *your* time is "wasted" on this effort is determined in
large part by the amount of energy you put into claiming it's a waste of
effort. There's an easy way to fix the portion of this problem that effects
you. ;-)

C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

Received on Thu Apr 5 19:57:07 2007

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.