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

RE: svn commit: r1096619 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc: translate.c translate.h workqueue.c

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 19:10:04 +0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 26 april 2011 17:31
> To: Hyrum K Wright
> Cc: dev_at_subversion.apache.org; Bert Huijben
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1096619 - in
> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc: translate.c translate.h
> workqueue.c

> I'm also fine with your approach. If/when perf problems are actually
> found, then we can analyze the fix. Additional flags or functions,
> *with a clear reason for their existence*, would be a fine solution in
> my mind. I see the problem (before your changes) as having N functions
> without any true clarity for why they exist. Deviating from your One
> True Function with clear explanation should avoid going back to that
> state.

The original code allowed users to version their ~/bin/ while explicitly not
setting svn:executable on their scripts.

When they applied local changes and then committed their files (for backup)
the +x bit would just stay enabled.

But when they received an update from the repository (needs review?), the
executable bit would be reset.

I expect that since our recent change we disable the execute bit on our
commit, because we just set the flags regardless of changes.

I kind of liked that old behavior... But I'm not sure if it is a breaking

Received on 2011-04-26 19:10:38 CEST

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.