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

Re: svn commit: r966381 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c

From: Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:21:07 -0400

Sweet. I'll get these revisions reviewed over the next 24 hours. Thanks!

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 16:15, Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: rhuijben_at_apache.org [mailto:rhuijben_at_apache.org]
>> Sent: woensdag 21 juli 2010 21:44
>> To: commits_at_subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: svn commit: r966381 -
>> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c
>>
>> Author: rhuijben
>> Date: Wed Jul 21 19:44:05 2010
>> New Revision: 966381
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=966381&view=rev
>> Log:
>> * subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c
>>   (svn_wc__db_upgrade_apply_props): Store the base_props in
>> WORKING_NODE,
>>     not (never!) the revert props.
>
> This last commit and the few previous (r966279, r966300 (fixes missing #endif) and more important r966313), fixed the last few remaining issues on upgrading to in-db properties.
>
> We still have the issue #2530 error, that makes the upgrade from 1.4.0 with specific replacement schedules fail (upgrade_tests.py 8). This test was specifically added to trigger this issue, so I think we can just mark it XFail until we know how to handle this.
>
>
>
> I think we are ready to switch to in-db properties now. If nobody objects, I would like to switch to in-db properties tomorrow, by switching to WC-format 18.
>
> @gstein: Can you please confirm that you read this mail and if possible review these revisions?
>
> Thanks,
>        Bert
>
>
Received on 2010-07-22 00:22:46 CEST

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