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

RE: svn commit: r959954 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc.h

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 00:17:27 +0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Swatosh [mailto:joe.swatosh_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: vrijdag 30 juli 2010 16:33
> To: Bert Huijben
> Cc: dev_at_subversion.apache.org; julian.foad_at_wandisco.com; Hyrum K.
> Wright
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r959954 -
> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc.h
>
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 1:21 AM, Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Joe Swatosh [mailto:joe.swatosh_at_gmail.com]
> >> Sent: vrijdag 30 juli 2010 3:50
>
> >
> > Julian is looking at the issue now.
> >
> > There is one more issue in the Ruby tests and you might be able to
> give me a
> > hint on where I can fix this.
> >
> > Shortly before switching to in-db properties I made it an error to
> update
> > properties on nodes that shouldn't have editable properties. (E.g.
> deleted
> > nodes)
> >
> > The Ruby tests trigger this error when they try to delete some
> mergeinfo,
> > but this error is a few levels deep in some lambda processing so I
> find it
> > hard to find out what the expected status should be here.
> >
>
> Thanks to you and Julian for fixing this!
>
> Those merge test failures are the other thing I was looking at when I
> confused myself about which revision started causing which failures.
> The merge tests in the Ruby bindings drive me nuts. They are
> complicated and fragile, and I don't like that they mess about with
> the mergeinfo property directly; mergeinfo _feels_ like it should be
> an implementation detail. So, while I was reasonably sure that the
> bindings weren't the problem in what you tested and Julian fixed, I'm
> going to have to spend some time with these to figure out what is
> what.
>
> What you describe above is true, but my initial tracing (just doing a
> svn st just before the delete) shows that the node already has
> property modifications (svn:mergeinfo is the only property), but isn't
> marked for deletion.

I think r981319 is the proper fix for this issue.

        Bert
Received on 2010-08-02 00:18:08 CEST

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