Re: svn commit: r1698359 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion: include/svn_io.h libsvn_subr/stream.c svnadmin/svnadmin.c svnfsfs/load-index-cmd.c tests/libsvn_subr/stream-test.c

Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com> writes:

> Uh, sorry, you don't get to dictate how the veto gets resolved. Reworking
> what's on trunk is as valid as reverting. If you don't intend to work on the
> solution, you may as well just let Stefan do that whichever way works best
> for him.

I certainly intend to work on the solution for the problems that I stated
in my e-mails, but it's a quite difficult task given the amount of changes
that target these problems, but happen without any prior discussion. This
has now happened twice — once with r1700305, and the second time with
r1700799, and I believe that both of these changes contain (other) problems.

The reason why I asked if Stefan could revert the old changes beforehand is
because otherwise it becomes easy to get lost for anyone who tries to get
the big picture of what's happening, what we are trying to fix, and how do
we do that.

Regards,
Evgeny Kotkov
Received on 2015-09-02 17:12:03 CEST