Paul Burba wrote on Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 20:03:26 -0400:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 1:16 AM, <danielsh_at_apache.org> wrote:
> > Author: danielsh
> > Date: Fri Sep 23 05:16:21 2011
> > New Revision: 1174517
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1174517&view=rev
> > Log:
> > * STATUS: Re-tweak my vote on the #4013 group.
> > Modified:
> > subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS
> > Modified: subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS?rev=1174517&r1=1174516&r2=1174517&view=diff
> > ==============================================================================
> > --- subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS (original)
> > +++ subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS Fri Sep 23 05:16:21 2011
> > @@ -126,7 +126,10 @@ Candidate changes:
> > +1: pburba, philip
> > +0: ivan (r1173425 only, restart soak period for at least two weeks due
> > API and client/server protocol)
> > - +0: danielsh (I didn't review merge_tests.py or merge.c changes)
> > + +0: danielsh (I didn't review merge_tests.py.
> > + All changes in merge.c look good, but I can't tell if
> > + additional changes that should have been included are
> > + missing, so not upgrading the vote to +1.)
> Hi Daniel,
> Does http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS?r1=1174813&r2=1174812&pathrev=1174813
> address your concerns? Or was there something else that concerned
Adding r1174797 to STATUS addresses my concrete concerns. However, as
I say in the parenthical:
I can't tell if additional changes that should have been included
are missing, so not upgrading the vote to +1.
I am simply not familiar enough with the mergeinfo code to tell if some
other code, in a part of mergeinfo.c or merge.c that the diff doesn't
touch, would be affected by the patch.
As things stand, we do not have three +1's for the parts of the change
not in the [libsvn_fs_*, libsvn_ra] range.
> > * r1174111
> > Use the correct function to copy repositories in the testsuite.
Received on 2011-09-27 14:09:56 CEST