On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Julian Foad
<julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com> wrote:
>> Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>>> [...] stefan2 told me in person that that part of the
>>> change in r1572363 was unintentional :-). IIUC, he didn't realize that
>>> it would have this effect on the output of dump.
> [...]
>>>>> I think the dump.c part of r1572363 and r1573111 should be reverted /
>>>>> fixed so that we get the previous behaviour again, and this should be
>>>>> backported to 1.9. At this point, IMO 'svnadmin dump' is broken in
>>>>> 1.9.
>
> 1. I pretty much agree now that we should revert the change.
>
> We understand now that the change in 1.9.0 was unintentional, and
> after we analyse the situation, we are very unlikely to conclude that
> that change was a complete bug fix to the whole issue of no-op
> changes. It is surprising and is regarded as losing information, and
> is not justified (yet) by some higher purpose.
>
> It seems fairly clear what the change was, and so how to revert it.
>
> 2. We might also want to make another change to the behaviour of
> 'svnadmin load', so that the result of loading a dump file that people
> have *already* produced using 1.9.0-1.9.2 will be the same as if they
> had dumped and loaded using 1.8.x. I don't yet understand the details
> enough to know whether this option is possible.
>
> 3. I firmly believe that our handling of 'no-op changes' is mistaken
> and a bad idea. I'll explain that, but not in this thread -- that's a
> follow-on task.
>
> Brane wrote:
>> I also suggest adding a note to
>> http://subversion.apache.org/docs/release-notes/1.9.html#issues .
>
> And we need to file an issue.
>
> I'll do both of those things (issue and rel-notes) now.
Thanks. I'm a bit swamped by $dayjob now.
--
Johan
Received on 2015-09-23 13:28:46 CEST