Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 1:43 AM, Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> wrote:
>
>> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>
>>> Karl (and others with BDB backend knowledge): this fix seems too easy to
>>> be true. Can you sanity check it, please?
>>>
>> I can't find anything wrong with this. Seems logical and nice and whythe***
>> didn't I notice this booboo years ago. :)
>>
>> You may want to make this comment sound a bit less perplexing to the casual
>> reader:
>>
>> /* KEY will be the entry name, VAL the dirent (about
>> which we really don't care) */
>>
>> since we do in fact care about VAL now.
>>
>> Good catch!
>>
>
> Brane,
>
> Can you give this a +1 for backport to 1.5.1? It needs a 3rd
> signature and it seems like you have reviewed it.
>
Yup, done -- and I threw a spanner in the works by adding r31859 to the
backport proposal. So r31820 should be good, but I was paranoid and
didn't assume Mike and Karl voted for the other (even though one
proposed and the other committed the change ...).
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-06-24 06:43:49 CEST