subversion-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bert Huijben" <b...@qqmail.nl>
Subject RE: svn commit: r1411982 - in /subversion/branches/1.6.x: ./ STATUS subversion/libsvn_client/commit_util.c subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/fs_fs.c
Date Wed, 21 Nov 2012 09:36:43 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: svn-role@apache.org [mailto:svn-role@apache.org]
> Sent: woensdag 21 november 2012 05:02
> To: commits@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: svn commit: r1411982 - in /subversion/branches/1.6.x: ./ STATUS
> subversion/libsvn_client/commit_util.c subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/fs_fs.c
> 
> Author: svn-role
> Date: Wed Nov 21 04:01:41 2012
> New Revision: 1411982
> 
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1411982&view=rev
> Log:
> Reintegrate the 1.6.x-rep_write_cleanup branch:
> 
>  * r1403964, r1403982, r1410106, r1410203
>    Make fs_fs properly cleanup after a failed transmission of a representation.
>    Justification:
>      Read errors can create problems for users of the WANdisco replicator
>      which does retry requests.  Can result in garbage representations in the
>      rev file.
>    Notes:



>      Branch is required since our client code needs a small tweak to deal
>      with pool lifetimes to make the fix work properly with ra_local.  We'd
>      made a similar change with wcng in 1.7 already.


What would be the effect of *not* patching the client?

What impact does this have on other users of the fs/repos apis?


In other words: Is this a breaking change that we shouldn't port back to 1.6 clients and try
to patch server only?

	Bert 


Mime
View raw message