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

Re: Performance branch review: single revision changes

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 12:07:21 +0200

Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:52:37 +0200:
> Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 7:47 AM, Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Stefan Fuhrmann [mailto:stefanfuhrmann_at_alice-dsl.de]
>>>>
>>>> * r982335
>>>> Limit the amount of unused memory kept in apr_pools
>>>>
>>> This mail looks like how we handle branches/1.Y.x/STATUS
>>>
>>> Maybe you should check it in to your branch to allow further updates (and
>>> review) there :)
>>>
>>
>> A good strategy.
>>
>> And thanks for sending this, Stefan, it will help this work get onto
>> trunk quicker.

*nod*

> Done in r998858.
> I was hesitant to do it in the first place because the
> review / merge direction is reversed in comparison
> to the 1.y.x branches.

Indeed, and if we were to prefer the "proposed merges are tracked at the
target tree" system then we could keep a STATUS file on trunk that lists
the pending merges from all feature branches, instead of keeping that
information on each individual branch.
Received on 2010-09-20 12:08:15 CEST

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