svn commit: r1071324 - /subversion/branches/1.6.x/STATUS

[st...@apache.org]

Author: stsp
Date: Wed Feb 16 17:43:02 2011
New Revision: 1071324

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1071324&view=rev
Log:
* STATUS: Cast some votes.

Modified:
    subversion/branches/1.6.x/STATUS

Modified: subversion/branches/1.6.x/STATUS
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/branches/1.6.x/STATUS?rev=1071324&r1=1071323&r2=1071324&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- subversion/branches/1.6.x/STATUS (original)
+++ subversion/branches/1.6.x/STATUS Wed Feb 16 17:43:02 2011
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ Candidate changes:
    Justification:
      Fixes an uninitialized variable that can result in a segfault.
    Votes:
-     +1: pburba
+     +1: pburba, stsp
 
  * r916286, r917512
    Fixes failing commmits (with vague error messages) seen on client
@@ -115,6 +115,7 @@ Candidate changes:
    Votes:
      +1: danielsh, blair
      -0: rhuijben (Should we apply a change like this in a patch release?)
+     -0:  stsp (I'd say no...)
 
  * r1036429
    Fix svnsync_tests 29 for BDB.
@@ -147,31 +148,6 @@ Candidate changes:
            didn't do a line-by-line review of the changes
      +0: danielsh (only touches java.m4)
 
- * r1051744, r1051745, r1053185, r1053241
-   Add additional assertions to the unit tests that use
-   svn_fs_commit_txn() and svn_repos_svn_commit_txn().
-   Justification:
-     Having additional assertions on svn_fs_commit_txn() and
-     svn_repos_svn_commit_txn() is good.
-   Branch:
-     ^/subversion/branches/1.6.x-r1051744
-     More unit tests exist in trunk than the branch, so this branch
-     just ignores the rejected hunks.
-     This branch also has:
-       r1053185 merged into it
-       r1053241, an "original" commit that copies the definition of
-         SVN_TEST_ASSERT() into svn_test.h.  This is an "original"
-         commit since there are no clean merges that would bring this
-         over.
-   Diff:
-     svn diff -x-p ^/subversion/branches/1.6.x@1052423 \
-     ^/subversion/branches/1.6.x-r1051744@HEAD
-   Notes:
-     Merge all the changes on the 1.6.x-r1051744 branch and then merge
-     r1051745.
-   Votes:
-     +1: blair, danielsh
-
  * 1.6.x-svn_fs_commit_txn branch
    Have all of server-side Subversion, from svn_fs_commit_txn(),
    through to mod_dav_svn, implement the documented (since 1.0.x)
@@ -213,6 +189,7 @@ Candidate changes:
      Local fix.  users@ reports.
    Votes:
      +0: danielsh
+     -0: stsp (doesn't merge cleanly. Please create a backport branch.)
 
  * r1058269
    Fix issue #3486, "attempt to add tree conflict that already exists" again.
@@ -240,7 +217,7 @@ Candidate changes:
    Justification:
      We backported part of this fix already -- we should finish the job.
    Votes:
-     +1: cmpilato
+     +1: cmpilato, stsp
 
  * r880146
    When in `--dry-run' mode of `svn merge' command, property conflicts made an
@@ -372,3 +349,30 @@ Veto-blocked changes:
 
 Approved changes:
 =================
+
+ * r1051744, r1051745, r1053185, r1053241
+   Add additional assertions to the unit tests that use
+   svn_fs_commit_txn() and svn_repos_svn_commit_txn().
+   Justification:
+     Having additional assertions on svn_fs_commit_txn() and
+     svn_repos_svn_commit_txn() is good.
+   Branch:
+     ^/subversion/branches/1.6.x-r1051744
+     More unit tests exist in trunk than the branch, so this branch
+     just ignores the rejected hunks.
+     This branch also has:
+       r1053185 merged into it
+       r1053241, an "original" commit that copies the definition of
+         SVN_TEST_ASSERT() into svn_test.h.  This is an "original"
+         commit since there are no clean merges that would bring this
+         over.
+   Diff:
+     svn diff -x-p ^/subversion/branches/1.6.x@1052423 \
+     ^/subversion/branches/1.6.x-r1051744@HEAD
+   Notes:
+     Merge all the changes on the 1.6.x-r1051744 branch and then merge
+     r1051745.
+   Votes:
+     +1: blair, danielsh, stsp
+
+