subversion-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Shahaf <...@daniel.shahaf.name>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1146452 - /subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS
Date Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:08:26 GMT
gstein@apache.org wrote on Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 20:51:17 -0000:
> Author: gstein
> Date: Wed Jul 13 20:51:17 2011
> New Revision: 1146452
> 
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1146452&view=rev
> Log:
> votes!
> 
> 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=1146452&r1=1146451&r2=1146452&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS (original)
> +++ subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS Wed Jul 13 20:51:17 2011
> @@ -15,14 +15,6 @@ Status of 1.7.0:
>  Candidate changes:
>  ==================
>  
> - * r1146013
> -   Improve notifications of paths skipped because they were conflicted
> -   Justification:
> -     Improves general usability of the svn client and the libsvn_client api
> -     and would have to wait for 1.8.0 if it doesn't get in 1.7.0.
> -   Votes:
> -     +1: rhuijben, cmpilato
> -
>   * r1146131, r1146134
>     Add svn_fs_verify() API.
>     Justification:
> @@ -32,6 +24,10 @@ Candidate changes:
>       +1: danielsh, rhuijben
>       -1: stsp (no-op API change)
>       -1: cmpilato (no-op API change -- will reconsider if real utility is added)
> +     -1: gstein (callers have no idea if the function will do anything
> +                 since they don't know if they're working with 1.7.0 or
> +                 1.7.10, so why bother to call it at all? cross your
> +                 fingers and hope?)

svn_fs_version().minor

>  
>   * r1146214, r1146381
>     Handle NULL inputs when stringifying svn_checksum_t.
> @@ -39,7 +35,8 @@ Candidate changes:
>       Avoids segfaults.
>     Votes:
>       +1: danielsh
> -     -0: cmpilato, rhuijben (problem is with callers, not implementation)
> +     -0: cmpilato, rhuijben, gstein (problem is with callers,
> +                                     not implementation)
>       

Just a reminder: this revision IS present on trunk, so someone please
suggest how to change trunk to avoid releasing this triply-(-0)ed change
in 1.8.0.

Mime
View raw message