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

Re: 1.5.0-rc1 up for signing/testing

From: Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 08:51:44 -0500

C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Kamesh Jayachandran wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> I tested
>> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.5.0-rc1/buda-oak/subversion-1.5.0-rc1.tar.bz2
>> and
>> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.5.0-rc1/buda-oak/subversion-deps-1.5.0-rc1.tar.bz2
>> in the following scenarios,
>> make check, svnserveautocheck over bdb and fsfs - No issues found.
>> make davautocheck (neon default) over bdb and fsfs - No issues found.
>> make davautocheck HTTP_LIBRARY=serf over bdb and fsfs - update_tests.py
>> 41 fails.
> Kamesh, your signature is your signature, of course, but does it not
> bother you that 41 update tests are failing?

Is serf still considered "experimental"? If so, should we 1) be testing
it, and 2) block on test failures in ra_serf?

This isn't an argument for either, I just don't remember if we've
answered the question before.


Received on 2008-04-08 15:51:59 CEST

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.