You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com> on 2008/07/21 22:47:51 UTC

SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Just a reminder, Hyrum has said he still plans to cut the 1.5.1
tarball on Wednesday.  There are a lot of items in STATUS that need
votes, including all of the fixes for the merge problems we have
identified in 1.5.0.  It would obviously be nice to get these into
this release.

It would also help if you could take the time to run the tests on the
1.5.x branch, particularly the bindings tests, in advance of cutting
the tarball so that there are no surprises.

-- 
Thanks

Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by Peter Wemm <pe...@wemm.org>.
We're hurting pretty badly on freebsd.org with the merge bugs still in STATUS:

$ export REPO=svn://svn.freebsd.org/base
$ svn co $REPO/stable/7/sys sys
$ svn merge -c 169605 $REPO/head/sys sys
svn: Working copy path 'modules/geom/geom_part' does not exist in repository
$ svn16 merge -c 169605 $REPO/head/sys sys
$

It isn't just the one directory - there are a few of them now.

You can look at the repo above, but beware.. there's 140M of source.

I built a snapshot from
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/branches/1.5.x-issue3067, and that
works:

$ rm -rf sys
$ svn co $REPO/stable/7/sys sys
$ svn merge -c 169605 $REPO/head/sys sys
svn: Working copy path 'modules/geom/geom_part' does not exist in repository
$ svn-i3067 merge -c 169605 $REPO/head/sys sys
$

-- 
Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; KI6FJV
"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5
"If Java had true garbage collection, most programs would delete
themselves upon execution." -- Robert Sewell

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
<hy...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:

> I also just finished running the ruby bindings tests, with the following
> result:
>
> Loaded suite .
> Started
> .....................................FF.............................................................................................................................................................................
> Finished in 477.69542 seconds.
>
>  1) Failure:
> test_merge(SvnClientTest)
> /home/hwright/dev/svn-1.5.x/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:1015:in
> `assert_merge'
> /home/hwright/dev/svn-1.5.x/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:1019:in
> `test_merge':
> <[]> expected to be != to
> <[]>.
>
>  2) Failure:
> test_merge_peg(SvnClientTest)
> /home/hwright/dev/svn-1.5.x/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:1015:in
> `assert_merge'
> /home/hwright/dev/svn-1.5.x/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:1025:in
> `test_merge_peg':
> <[]> expected to be != to
> <[]>.
>
> 212 tests, 1440 assertions, 2 failures, 0 errors
> make: *** [check-swig-rb] Error 1
> hwright@spock:~/dev/svn-1.5.x$
>
>
> I don't yet know if that error exists on trunk, but could one of the Ruby
> folks
> take a look at this?

This came up last week when the Python bindings were discovered to
have problems.  One of Paul Burba's items in STATUS, I think the
issue-3067 branch, fixes the tests.

-- 
Thanks

Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>.
Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> Karl Fogel wrote:
>> "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu> writes:
>>> Oh, I totally agree, but this is more a question of logistics and not
>>> one of "let's hold the release for this one last patch".  From a
>>> pragmatic point-of-view, if the actually testing and signing will be
>>> held up by some quasi-foreseeable event, we might as well postpone
>>> rolling the tarball.  This has the serendipitous consequence that it
>>> gives reviewers more time, and hence more stuff gets into the release.
>>
>> I do think the Wednesday that OSCON opens is a bit close, for some of us
>> anyway :-).  I'd love to see a few more days to review, but if it has to
>> be Wednesday, then Wednesday it is.  The important thing is to keep the
>> release buses coming, so there'll be another one along any moment now.
> 
> On a related note, I won't be rolling until the r32164 group has been 
> merged, since it fixes a known test failure the python bindings.  It 
> seems counterproductive to roll a tarball with known test failures.

I also just finished running the ruby bindings tests, with the following result:

Loaded suite .
Started
.....................................FF.............................................................................................................................................................................
Finished in 477.69542 seconds.

   1) Failure:
test_merge(SvnClientTest)
/home/hwright/dev/svn-1.5.x/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:1015:in 
`assert_merge'
/home/hwright/dev/svn-1.5.x/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:1019:in 
`test_merge':
<[]> expected to be != to
<[]>.

   2) Failure:
test_merge_peg(SvnClientTest)
/home/hwright/dev/svn-1.5.x/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:1015:in 
`assert_merge'
/home/hwright/dev/svn-1.5.x/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_client.rb:1025:in 
`test_merge_peg':
<[]> expected to be != to
<[]>.

212 tests, 1440 assertions, 2 failures, 0 errors
make: *** [check-swig-rb] Error 1
hwright@spock:~/dev/svn-1.5.x$


I don't yet know if that error exists on trunk, but could one of the Ruby folks
take a look at this?

-Hyrum



Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>.
Hyrum K. Wright wrote on Tue, 22 Jul 2008 at 09:12 -0500:
> Also, there are some issues merging r32023 to 1.5.x, primarily because it
> makes changes to a file which doesn't exist on the branch.  Could somebody
> with more knowledge of that change either: 1) Do the merge, or 2) create a
> backport branch for the change?

Merged in r32220, sorry for not noticing that earlier.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>.
Karl Fogel wrote:
> "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu> writes:
>> Oh, I totally agree, but this is more a question of logistics and not
>> one of "let's hold the release for this one last patch".  From a
>> pragmatic point-of-view, if the actually testing and signing will be
>> held up by some quasi-foreseeable event, we might as well postpone
>> rolling the tarball.  This has the serendipitous consequence that it
>> gives reviewers more time, and hence more stuff gets into the release.
> 
> I do think the Wednesday that OSCON opens is a bit close, for some of us
> anyway :-).  I'd love to see a few more days to review, but if it has to
> be Wednesday, then Wednesday it is.  The important thing is to keep the
> release buses coming, so there'll be another one along any moment now.

On a related note, I won't be rolling until the r32164 group has been merged, 
since it fixes a known test failure the python bindings.  It seems 
counterproductive to roll a tarball with known test failures.

Also, there are some issues merging r32023 to 1.5.x, primarily because it makes 
changes to a file which doesn't exist on the branch.  Could somebody with more 
knowledge of that change either: 1) Do the merge, or 2) create a backport branch 
for the change?

Thanks,
-Hyrum


Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 8:59 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
> <hy...@mail.utexas.edu> >
>> Good point.  Wednesday evening sound good for an OSCON Subversion
>> hack-a-thon?
> 
> Yup.  Should we meet up at say 6pm?  We can hack for a bit, hopefully
> post 1.5.1 for testing/votes, then go off for dinner?
> 
> FWIW, I should be free after 3pm, so if folks want to meet up before
> 6pm, I'd be up for that too...  -- justin

That works for me.  We could meet in the lobby outside of Ben and Fitz's evening 
talk, and then find somewhere to go from there.

-Hyrum


Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 8:59 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
<hy...@mail.utexas.edu> >
> Good point.  Wednesday evening sound good for an OSCON Subversion
> hack-a-thon?

Yup.  Should we meet up at say 6pm?  We can hack for a bit, hopefully
post 1.5.1 for testing/votes, then go off for dinner?

FWIW, I should be free after 3pm, so if folks want to meet up before
6pm, I'd be up for that too...  -- justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:30 AM, Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com> wrote:
>> I do think the Wednesday that OSCON opens is a bit close, for some of us
>> anyway :-).  I'd love to see a few more days to review, but if it has to
>> be Wednesday, then Wednesday it is.  The important thing is to keep the
>> release buses coming, so there'll be another one along any moment now.
> 
> Well, 'cuz a bunch of us are here, it might make sense to just meet up
> and do a collective review/test-a-thon.  -- justin

Good point.  Wednesday evening sound good for an OSCON Subversion hack-a-thon?

-Hyrum


Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:30 AM, Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com> wrote:
> I do think the Wednesday that OSCON opens is a bit close, for some of us
> anyway :-).  I'd love to see a few more days to review, but if it has to
> be Wednesday, then Wednesday it is.  The important thing is to keep the
> release buses coming, so there'll be another one along any moment now.

Well, 'cuz a bunch of us are here, it might make sense to just meet up
and do a collective review/test-a-thon.  -- justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com>.
"Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu> writes:
> Oh, I totally agree, but this is more a question of logistics and not
> one of "let's hold the release for this one last patch".  From a
> pragmatic point-of-view, if the actually testing and signing will be
> held up by some quasi-foreseeable event, we might as well postpone
> rolling the tarball.  This has the serendipitous consequence that it
> gives reviewers more time, and hence more stuff gets into the release.

I do think the Wednesday that OSCON opens is a bit close, for some of us
anyway :-).  I'd love to see a few more days to review, but if it has to
be Wednesday, then Wednesday it is.  The important thing is to keep the
release buses coming, so there'll be another one along any moment now.

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>.
Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:10 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
> <hy...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>> Mark Phippard wrote:
>>> Just a reminder, Hyrum has said he still plans to cut the 1.5.1
>>> tarball on Wednesday.  There are a lot of items in STATUS that need
>>> votes, including all of the fixes for the merge problems we have
>>> identified in 1.5.0.  It would obviously be nice to get these into
>>> this release.
>>>
>>> It would also help if you could take the time to run the tests on the
>>> 1.5.x branch, particularly the bindings tests, in advance of cutting
>>> the tarball so that there are no surprises.
>> (Mark keeps beating me to the punch on sending out these emails.  At least I
>> don't have to be the sole project nag now.  :P )
>>
>> Yes, I'm still planning on cutting the 1.5.1 release tarball this Wednesday.
>> Several of the committers have indicated they'll be at OSCON (myself
>> included), and that may mean that folks won't have too much time to test a
>> release until the weekend or the first part of next week.  If people think
>> that this will be a problem, I'm willing to push the date back a few days,
>> which would give additional time for reviewers to review, because testing
>> would be delayed anyway.
>>
>> Unless I hear otherwise, though, I'm still planning for Wednesday.
> 
> Absent any strong dissent from other committers, I think it is largely
> your call.  While I would really like to see all these merge fixes get
> into 1.5.1, I also like the idea of drawing a line in the sand and
> sticking to it.  If we don't get the fixes in then that is our own
> fault and we'll just have to get it done for 1.5.2 and spend another
> month answering to the problems our users are having.

Oh, I totally agree, but this is more a question of logistics and not one of 
"let's hold the release for this one last patch".  From a pragmatic 
point-of-view, if the actually testing and signing will be held up by some 
quasi-foreseeable event, we might as well postpone rolling the tarball.  This 
has the serendipitous consequence that it gives reviewers more time, and hence 
more stuff gets into the release.

That's all I'm sayin'.

-Hyrum


Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:10 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
<hy...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> Mark Phippard wrote:
>>
>> Just a reminder, Hyrum has said he still plans to cut the 1.5.1
>> tarball on Wednesday.  There are a lot of items in STATUS that need
>> votes, including all of the fixes for the merge problems we have
>> identified in 1.5.0.  It would obviously be nice to get these into
>> this release.
>>
>> It would also help if you could take the time to run the tests on the
>> 1.5.x branch, particularly the bindings tests, in advance of cutting
>> the tarball so that there are no surprises.
>
> (Mark keeps beating me to the punch on sending out these emails.  At least I
> don't have to be the sole project nag now.  :P )
>
> Yes, I'm still planning on cutting the 1.5.1 release tarball this Wednesday.
> Several of the committers have indicated they'll be at OSCON (myself
> included), and that may mean that folks won't have too much time to test a
> release until the weekend or the first part of next week.  If people think
> that this will be a problem, I'm willing to push the date back a few days,
> which would give additional time for reviewers to review, because testing
> would be delayed anyway.
>
> Unless I hear otherwise, though, I'm still planning for Wednesday.

Absent any strong dissent from other committers, I think it is largely
your call.  While I would really like to see all these merge fixes get
into 1.5.1, I also like the idea of drawing a line in the sand and
sticking to it.  If we don't get the fixes in then that is our own
fault and we'll just have to get it done for 1.5.2 and spend another
month answering to the problems our users are having.

-- 
Thanks

Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: SVN 1.5.1 this Wednesday. Please review and vote in STATUS

Posted by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>.
Mark Phippard wrote:
> Just a reminder, Hyrum has said he still plans to cut the 1.5.1
> tarball on Wednesday.  There are a lot of items in STATUS that need
> votes, including all of the fixes for the merge problems we have
> identified in 1.5.0.  It would obviously be nice to get these into
> this release.
> 
> It would also help if you could take the time to run the tests on the
> 1.5.x branch, particularly the bindings tests, in advance of cutting
> the tarball so that there are no surprises.

(Mark keeps beating me to the punch on sending out these emails.  At least I 
don't have to be the sole project nag now.  :P )

Yes, I'm still planning on cutting the 1.5.1 release tarball this Wednesday. 
Several of the committers have indicated they'll be at OSCON (myself included), 
and that may mean that folks won't have too much time to test a release until 
the weekend or the first part of next week.  If people think that this will be a 
problem, I'm willing to push the date back a few days, which would give 
additional time for reviewers to review, because testing would be delayed anyway.

Unless I hear otherwise, though, I'm still planning for Wednesday.

-Hyrum