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

Re: commits made directly to 1.5.x (was: Re: svn commit: r31506 - branches/1.5.x/subversion/svn)

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.co.il>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:41:06 +0300 (Jerusalem Daylight Time)

Erik Huelsmann wrote on Thu, 29 May 2008 at 11:06 +0200:
> On 5/29/08, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 05:58:14PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 5:22 PM, Lieven Govaerts <svnlgo_at_mobsol.be> wrote:
> > > > As simple as this change might be, it breaks one of the getopt tests. The getopt tests are one of the only tests really matching the actual
> > > > string content character per character. I know these tests are overly strict, but while we have them I propose you run at least those
> > > > before you commit a text change inside the code.
> > >
> > > And as you said in the other email, why are we doing direct commits to
> > > the branch, without going through STATUS or even a dev@ email, right
> > > before we are about to make the release?
> >
> > Shouldn't we immediately back out r31503 and r31506, both of which were
> > directly committed to 1.5.x without being voted for in STATUS?
> > Because what's the point in having STATUS if people don't use it?
> >

+1.

It didn't go through STATUS and I saw no discussion on the list either.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-05-29 19:41:22 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.