Karl Fogel wrote on Thu, 8 May 2008 at 15:22 -0400:
> Daniel Shahaf <danielsh_at_tigris.org> writes:
> > following discussion I moved the nomination to 1.5.1. Does this address
> > your concerns?
>
> Well, my concerns were more along the lines of "Is this worth porting to
> 1.5.x at all?" Since svn_path_is_canonical() is new in 1.5, there's a
> better argument for porting this test than most tests; however, it's
> still going to get tested on trunk (1.6, 1.7, etc) all the time anyway,
> so I personally don't think it's worth the porting overhead.
>
> But it's a judgement call. I'm not asking you to remove it from STATUs,
> just reminding that porting comes at a cost (in reviewing/voting, and in
> merging by whoever does the merge), so let's not go overboard.
>
Since currently the implementations on trunk and in 1.5.x are identical,
and since 1.5.x has tests for svn_path_canonicalize(), I'll unnominate
it in r31099.
Thanks for the reminder,
Daniel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 21:33:47 CEST