On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
> [ note that I've reflowed this conversation so it'd readable. Please bottom
> post in the future. Thanks! ]
artifact of gmail, sorry
> Mark Eichin wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
>> <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>>> Mark Eichin wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Hyrum K. Wright
>>>> <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>>>>> New official branch date: Nov. 12.
>>>> Does that suggest that the "empty revision range" fix could get
>>>> included in 1.6, if I could get some one to look at it in the next
>>> I'm not familiar with the specific fix you are referring to, but the
>>> basic gist of what gets into a release and what doesn't can be found here:
>>> Has the patch you refer to already been committed to trunk?
>> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2008-10/1170.shtml has the description,
>> suggested patch, and attached script to reproduce the problem by
>> creating a repository and doing some simple merges (subject: svn
>> mergeinfo bug with script to reproduce it (finally)! (was Re: empty
>> mergeinfo produced by svn_mergeinfo_inheritable))
>> As far as release definitions go, I'd actually want to see it go in
>> 1.5.5 (since it breaks merges and was introduced in 1.5.0), but I
>> haven't gotten any responses (beyond another end user reporting that
>> they see the problem too...)
> You didn't answer my question, but I gather by your response that the patch
> isn't yet in trunk. At this point, it depends on if somebody finds the time to
> review the patch and commit the fix. With people working to get trunk in a
> branchable state, that might not happen for a while.
Correct - it's not on trunk, and noone's apparently found the time to
even run the reproduction test script.
> However, if the patch is a bug fix, there's no problem with it going into the
> branch after it's created, so you've got some home. I'd wait a couple of weeks
> for things to settle down and then poke people again.
Ah, I hadn't realized this project didn't do "bugs before features".
Also, I figured that if the branch date was moving because
merge-related tests were failing on trunk anyway, that whoever was
working on that would probably be looking at the relevant code anyway,
so it might be a good time to get it reviewed (or at least looked at
enough to make a ticket out of it, I haven't even seen that much
Thanks for the advice.
_Mark_ <eichin_at_thok.org> <eichin_at_gmail.com>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-11-04 23:26:24 CET