> I'd like to be a little selfish and wonder if it would be useful to release a
> 1.6.7 version faster than normal. (Especially since the release schedule
> may be affected by the amount of holiday time near the end of the year.)
> We are really getting hurt by the external problems that were fixed in r40152
> and merged into 1.6.x in r40219. Without this change we can't move a large
> number of our users from 1.5, and I would rather not be forced to compile
> custom patched versions for all the clients we use.
> (command line x 4 platforms, TortoiseSVN, Subclipse)
> Looking at STATUS, there are some other things already nominated (but need
> votes!!!) that also seem useful:
> * Fix for #3432
> * Win 7 exception handler support
> * Fix for #3489
> * Win32 performance improvements
> * future-proof patch
> * Fix for #3519
For those who don't have a numerically-keyed hash of issues in their
* Fix for #3432:
"Merge can record mergeinfo from natural history gaps"
* Fix for #3489:
"Filenames with @ cannot be committed to the repository unless an @ is
added at the end."
* future-proof patch
"Make 1.6.7 (and subsequent Subversion releases) recognize Subversion
1.7+ working copies."
* Fix for #3519:
"ra_serf using Label header unsupported by mod_dav_svn"
> I don't see it nominated, but the svn+ssh changes for windows may also
> fix some server resource problems others were seeing (We don't use svn+ssh,
> so I can't comment.)
> Is it too soon to be talking about this?
+1 to the general notion of getting a 1.6.7 release out as soon as we
have some useful fixes in it.
Received on 2009-11-04 17:49:18 CET