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

Re: svn commit: r31084 - branches/1.5.x

From: Daniel Shahaf <danielsh_at_tigris.org>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 22:16:22 +0300 (Jerusalem Daylight Time)

Karl Fogel wrote on Thu, 8 May 2008 at 14:50 -0400:
> danielsh_at_tigris.org writes:
> > Log:
> > Nominate r31083.
> Not a big deal, but is it really necessary to port new tests over to a
> release/maintenance branch? When they test something that was
> specifically ported to that branch, I can understand it, but except for
> that case, my feeling is let's not make more work for the release
> manager (and reviewers).
> I'm certainly prepared to be shown that I haven't thought this through
> carefully enough, of course... :-)
> -Karl

In this case, I agree that the test is not strictly necessary for 1.5.x,
since svn_path_is_canonical is a trivial wrapper around
svn_path_canonicalize, and the latter is already tested.

    svn_path_is_canonical(const char *path, apr_pool_t *pool)
      return (strcmp(path, svn_path_canonicalize(path, pool)) == 0);

In general, however, I assumed that tests for an API that made it to
a release branch should be backported to the branch (whether or not the
API is new in that branch).

Stefan Sperling also questioned the backport over IRC this afternoon;
following discussion I moved the nomination to 1.5.1. Does this address
your concerns?



To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-05-08 21:16:44 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.