No, we said if somebody breaks the build, then it can be reverted.
Breaking the tests does not qualify. You were out of line. I just got
telling off people in Lucene-land for this. I also said that if it were up
to me, I would warn somebody about the anti social behavior once, and remove
their commit privs on the second time. It is THAT much of a problem in the
Don't do that again.
On May 18, 2011 1:50 AM, "Bert Huijben" <bert_at_qqmail.nl> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Hyrum K Wright [mailto:hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org]
>> Sent: woensdag 18 mei 2011 1:11
>> To: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
>> Cc: commits_at_subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1104610 - in
>> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc: props.c wc_db.c wc_db.h
>> I understand the desire to get the buildbots green again, and I'm
>> sorry these revisions which I committed broke the bots, but a little
>> patience might have been useful here. We have a long tradition of
>> allowing folks to attempt to fix problems, rather than reverting their
>> commits without consultation. I kinda wish you'd have given me
>> another 12 hours to attempt to fix it, rather than reverting.
> We also have the generic rule that any committer (full or partial) may
> revert something that makes it impossible for them to do further
> development. (See hacking)
> And tomorrow morning the asf repository will be readonly for quite some
> time, so waiting till after that will probably cause more delays.
> Besides, you just mailed that you weren't going to fix this issue... :-)
> Somehow the test that should have picked up the original failure is
> It thinks that no output at all for a recursive proplist is ok.
> So two different bugs (the local changes one; and the base-deleted one)
> together kept the prop_tests.py 15 test succeeding.
Received on 2011-05-18 11:07:36 CEST