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

Re: 1.9.0-rc2 up for testing/signing

From: Ivan Zhakov <ivan_at_visualsvn.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 15:57:50 +0300

On 3 June 2015 at 15:35, Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> On 03.06.2015 14:24, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>> On 3 June 2015 at 14:37, Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
>>> On 02.06.2015 20:05, Branko Čibej wrote:
>>>> On 02.06.2015 12:45, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>>>> Ben Reser wrote on Sun, May 31, 2015 at 14:28:39 -0700:
>>>>>> The 1.9.0-rc2 release artifacts are now available for testing/signing.
>>>>>> Please get the tarballs from
>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/subversion
>>>>>> and add your signatures there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>> Note that Evgeny reported a regression in svn_repos_verify_fs2() in
>>>>> <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2015-05/0141.shtml>. No objections to
>>>>> moving forward with rc2, but as that issue is a regression, we'll need
>>>>> an rc3 that fixes it.
>>>> Yes ... and the patch has been reviewed but not committed. I believe it
>>>> only needs a couple tweaks (fixing an "if" condition and removing the
>>>> unused error code).
>>> I have a more complete fix based on Evgeny's patch, running tests now.
>>> It turns out that we still need a new error code for the summary
>>> results, but with a different meaning and therefore different name.
>>> Renaming it had a positive side effect as it turned out that we were
>>> emitting the SVN_ERR_REPOS_CORRUPTED error from FSFS and FSX instead of
>>> the correct SVN_ERR_FS_CORRUPT.
>>>
>> Another option would be to require notify_func for
>> svn_repos_verify_fs3() and always report errors through notify_func.
>> This would make error reporting consistent whether keep_going TRUE or
>> FALSE. For svn_repos_verify_fs2() we could create compat notify_func
>> handler that converts notifications to errors.
>
> See r1683311; I believe error reporting is consistent now.

> Adding complex logic to the deprecated function isn't such a good idea, IMO.
Maybe, but it's better than adding complex logic to current
(not-deprecated) function. IMO it's not svn_repos_verify_fs3()
responsibility to generate verification summary -- it should be done
at the UI level. I.e. in svnadmin or other application using
svn_repos_verify_fs3() API.

-- 
Ivan Zhakov
Received on 2015-06-03 14:58:31 CEST

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