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

Re: Status of 1.7.3

From: Hyrum K Wright <hyrum.wright_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 13:24:04 -0600

On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 12:26 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
>> Bah.  I'd be surprised if most of our editors supported postfix text deltas.
>>  To my knowledge, there is exactly one driver which uses that approach in
>> our own codebase (the commit driver).  So, I can easily forgive svnrdump's
>> dump editor (and any other non-commit editor) for not supporting postfix
>> text deltas.  That's one of two valid "modes" of an editor drive -- one
>> rarely used in practice.
>> ra_serf has a well-established history (and intentional design) which
>> violates a far more fundamental editor restriction which applies to both
>> "modes" -- depth-first-ness.  (See
>> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2932 for details.)  This
>> is why I'm more apt to think that the problem here is with ra_serf than with
>> svnrdump.
> In terms of 1.7.3, which is the scope of this discussion, the only
> thing that should be relevant is whether this is a significant
> regression from previous 1.7 releases. If we tolerated the bug for
> 1.7.0 there is no point in holding up 1.7.3 while we discuss it.

I think the concern is that 1.7.3 servers may cause more problems than
1.7.0-1.7.2 servers. I also get the feeling that it's all academic at
this point, though.

That being said, I'll wait for the nightly merges to go through
tonight, and roll the 1.7.3 tarball tomorrow as promised.


uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
Received on 2012-02-09 20:24:35 CET

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