You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net> on 2011/02/14 10:55:48 UTC
Patches pending review
I have been working on some issues lately but I have not got many review
comments for the same. I have listed them below so that it gets some
attention and I can move forward.
1. I started sending patches for
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0210.shtml long back and one
of them got committed in r1068977. Apart from that there are two
more patches as a follow-up to r1068977
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-02/0315.shtml
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0298.shtml
Similarly I will be submitting more once these patches are reviewed
and committed.
2. Issue 3792
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-02/0061.shtml
I got some review comments from Daniel and incorporated them into the
latest version of the patch. There is another issue 3787 which is
kind of related to this one. I thought of working on that also once
this one gets a +1.
3. Issue 3690
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0414.shtml
This is actually an enhancement and there were two approaches. One
that I initially submitted and another one suggested by Hyrum. This
thread has three to four patches which are pending review. May be it
is not getting reviewed because it is not yet finalized how are are
we going to proceed.
It will be great if these things get some attention.
Thanks and Regards
Noorul
Re: Patches pending review
Posted by Gavin Beau Baumanis <ga...@thespidernet.com>.
Hi Noorul,
Just so you know, there is absolutely no issue at all with pinging your own patch submissions.
If anything, I encourage it - after all, if you're not going to see your submission through to the end of the submission process (regardless of the outcome) - who is?
Please also take onboard, that I "normally" wait a week (or so) to ping the list about threads that have not seen any comments.
I suppose I really wanted you to know that "I" wasn't ignoring your patches and they would have been bumped on the list over the next couple of days, anyway.
As always - please let me know if there is ever anything I can do for you with respect to a patch submission.
Gavin "Beau" Baumanis
On 14/02/2011, at 8:55 PM, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
>
> I have been working on some issues lately but I have not got many review
> comments for the same. I have listed them below so that it gets some
> attention and I can move forward.
>
> 1. I started sending patches for
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0210.shtml long back and one
> of them got committed in r1068977. Apart from that there are two
> more patches as a follow-up to r1068977
>
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-02/0315.shtml
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0298.shtml
>
> Similarly I will be submitting more once these patches are reviewed
> and committed.
>
> 2. Issue 3792
>
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-02/0061.shtml
>
> I got some review comments from Daniel and incorporated them into the
> latest version of the patch. There is another issue 3787 which is
> kind of related to this one. I thought of working on that also once
> this one gets a +1.
>
> 3. Issue 3690
>
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0414.shtml
>
> This is actually an enhancement and there were two approaches. One
> that I initially submitted and another one suggested by Hyrum. This
> thread has three to four patches which are pending review. May be it
> is not getting reviewed because it is not yet finalized how are are
> we going to proceed.
>
> It will be great if these things get some attention.
>
> Thanks and Regards
> Noorul
Re: Patches pending review
Posted by Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net>.
Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 02:49:12PM +0530, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
>
>> Daniel Becroft <dj...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Hyrum K Wright <
>> > hyrum@hyrumwright.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Noorul Islam K M <
>> > noorul@collab.net> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > See below in line more information about the patches.
>> > >
>> > > Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net> writes:
>> > ...
>> > >> 3. Issue 3690
>> > >>
>> > >> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0414.shtml
>> > >>
>> > >> This is actually an enhancement and there were two
>> > approaches. One
>> > >> that I initially submitted and another one suggested by
>> > Hyrum. This
>> > >> thread has three to four patches which are pending review.
>> > May be it
>> > >> is not getting reviewed because it is not yet finalized how
>> > are are
>> > >> we going to proceed.
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > Above thread contains patches for issue 3690 which adds an
>> > option
>> > > "--ignore-properties" to log command so that user can ignore
>> > revisions
>> > > which has only property changes.
>> >
>> > I've said multiple times (both in regards to this, as well as the
>> > ignore-mergeinfo-log branch) that I'd appreciate some discussion
>> > surrounding the applicability of these features before committing
>> > them. Part of me sees the use, as they solve a real usability
>> > problem
>> > in my own life, but another part of me wonders if these are
>> > specific
>> > fixes for which other (non-core) solutions would be appropriate.
>> >
>> > Maybe I should spearhead that discussion, since I'm the guy who
>> > wants
>> > it so badly, but unfortunately my supply of tuits has been quite
>> > low
>> > lately. I'm just not in any rush to get this work on trunk, as
>> > if we
>> > do add this functionality, I'd like to do it for as many
>> > subcommands
>> > as is reasonable, all in the same release. And that ain't
>> > happening
>> > before 1.7 (imho).
>> >
>> > -Hyrum
>> >
>> >
>> > My 0.02c - there was a question raised on the users@ list, regarding
>> > the ability to see the changes that *only* relate to properties. The
>> > use case was seeing the log for svn:externals changes on a directory.
>> >
>> > I guess this is the opposite of the above request: one where we can
>> > exclude all property changes, the other where we want nothing but
>> > property changes.
>> >
>>
>> That means we need to have two options, --ignore-properties and
>> --properties-only. Can I work on these two on a private branch?
>>
>> Thanks and Regards
>> Noorul
>
> I haven't been following this closely. But as Hyrum points out,
> it seems that more design work is needed before much coding can be done.
>
> Branch or not, you'll need to find a full committer willing to help
> with the design and review the implementation.
>
> The problem with that is that most developers are currently focused
> on working towards the 1.7 release. There is little room at the
> moment for designing new features that aren't planned to appear in 1.7.
>
> So maybe we can postpone work on this feature for later?
>
> In the meantime, there are quite a number of issues with milestones
> 1.7.0 and 1.7-consider. Those are likely to catch more attention at
> the moment, since everyone is focused on getting the release done.
>
> See these two links:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/buglist.cgi?issue_status=UNCONFIRMED&issue_status=NEW&issue_status=STARTED&issue_status=REOPENED&target_milestone=1.7.0
>
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/buglist.cgi?issue_status=UNCONFIRMED&issue_status=NEW&issue_status=STARTED&issue_status=REOPENED&target_milestone=1.7-consider
>
> It would help tremendously to get any of these issues closed.
>
Fair enough, thank you.
Thanks and Regards
Noorul
Re: Patches pending review
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 04:27:16PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> In the meantime, there are quite a number of issues with milestones
> 1.7.0 and 1.7-consider. Those are likely to catch more attention at
> the moment, since everyone is focused on getting the release done.
>
> See these two links:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/buglist.cgi?issue_status=UNCONFIRMED&issue_status=NEW&issue_status=STARTED&issue_status=REOPENED&target_milestone=1.7.0
>
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/buglist.cgi?issue_status=UNCONFIRMED&issue_status=NEW&issue_status=STARTED&issue_status=REOPENED&target_milestone=1.7-consider
>
> It would help tremendously to get any of these issues closed.
>
> Stefan
The notes/xfail-status file on trunk might also be a good place to look.
Some of these might need more work, and some even list point-persons
you can ask for details (though it would be wise to always Cc the dev@
list if you do so).
Re: Patches pending review
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 02:49:12PM +0530, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
> Daniel Becroft <dj...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Hyrum K Wright <
> > hyrum@hyrumwright.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Noorul Islam K M <
> > noorul@collab.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > See below in line more information about the patches.
> > >
> > > Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net> writes:
> > ...
> > >> 3. Issue 3690
> > >>
> > >> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0414.shtml
> > >>
> > >> This is actually an enhancement and there were two
> > approaches. One
> > >> that I initially submitted and another one suggested by
> > Hyrum. This
> > >> thread has three to four patches which are pending review.
> > May be it
> > >> is not getting reviewed because it is not yet finalized how
> > are are
> > >> we going to proceed.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Above thread contains patches for issue 3690 which adds an
> > option
> > > "--ignore-properties" to log command so that user can ignore
> > revisions
> > > which has only property changes.
> >
> > I've said multiple times (both in regards to this, as well as the
> > ignore-mergeinfo-log branch) that I'd appreciate some discussion
> > surrounding the applicability of these features before committing
> > them. Part of me sees the use, as they solve a real usability
> > problem
> > in my own life, but another part of me wonders if these are
> > specific
> > fixes for which other (non-core) solutions would be appropriate.
> >
> > Maybe I should spearhead that discussion, since I'm the guy who
> > wants
> > it so badly, but unfortunately my supply of tuits has been quite
> > low
> > lately. I'm just not in any rush to get this work on trunk, as
> > if we
> > do add this functionality, I'd like to do it for as many
> > subcommands
> > as is reasonable, all in the same release. And that ain't
> > happening
> > before 1.7 (imho).
> >
> > -Hyrum
> >
> >
> > My 0.02c - there was a question raised on the users@ list, regarding
> > the ability to see the changes that *only* relate to properties. The
> > use case was seeing the log for svn:externals changes on a directory.
> >
> > I guess this is the opposite of the above request: one where we can
> > exclude all property changes, the other where we want nothing but
> > property changes.
> >
>
> That means we need to have two options, --ignore-properties and
> --properties-only. Can I work on these two on a private branch?
>
> Thanks and Regards
> Noorul
I haven't been following this closely. But as Hyrum points out,
it seems that more design work is needed before much coding can be done.
Branch or not, you'll need to find a full committer willing to help
with the design and review the implementation.
The problem with that is that most developers are currently focused
on working towards the 1.7 release. There is little room at the
moment for designing new features that aren't planned to appear in 1.7.
So maybe we can postpone work on this feature for later?
In the meantime, there are quite a number of issues with milestones
1.7.0 and 1.7-consider. Those are likely to catch more attention at
the moment, since everyone is focused on getting the release done.
See these two links:
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/buglist.cgi?issue_status=UNCONFIRMED&issue_status=NEW&issue_status=STARTED&issue_status=REOPENED&target_milestone=1.7.0
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/buglist.cgi?issue_status=UNCONFIRMED&issue_status=NEW&issue_status=STARTED&issue_status=REOPENED&target_milestone=1.7-consider
It would help tremendously to get any of these issues closed.
Stefan
Re: Patches pending review
Posted by Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net>.
Daniel Becroft <dj...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Hyrum K Wright <
> hyrum@hyrumwright.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Noorul Islam K M <
> noorul@collab.net> wrote:
> >
> > See below in line more information about the patches.
> >
> > Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net> writes:
> ...
> >> 3. Issue 3690
> >>
> >> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0414.shtml
> >>
> >> This is actually an enhancement and there were two
> approaches. One
> >> that I initially submitted and another one suggested by
> Hyrum. This
> >> thread has three to four patches which are pending review.
> May be it
> >> is not getting reviewed because it is not yet finalized how
> are are
> >> we going to proceed.
> >>
> >
> > Above thread contains patches for issue 3690 which adds an
> option
> > "--ignore-properties" to log command so that user can ignore
> revisions
> > which has only property changes.
>
> I've said multiple times (both in regards to this, as well as the
> ignore-mergeinfo-log branch) that I'd appreciate some discussion
> surrounding the applicability of these features before committing
> them. Part of me sees the use, as they solve a real usability
> problem
> in my own life, but another part of me wonders if these are
> specific
> fixes for which other (non-core) solutions would be appropriate.
>
> Maybe I should spearhead that discussion, since I'm the guy who
> wants
> it so badly, but unfortunately my supply of tuits has been quite
> low
> lately. I'm just not in any rush to get this work on trunk, as
> if we
> do add this functionality, I'd like to do it for as many
> subcommands
> as is reasonable, all in the same release. And that ain't
> happening
> before 1.7 (imho).
>
> -Hyrum
>
>
> My 0.02c - there was a question raised on the users@ list, regarding
> the ability to see the changes that *only* relate to properties. The
> use case was seeing the log for svn:externals changes on a directory.
>
> I guess this is the opposite of the above request: one where we can
> exclude all property changes, the other where we want nothing but
> property changes.
>
That means we need to have two options, --ignore-properties and
--properties-only. Can I work on these two on a private branch?
Thanks and Regards
Noorul
Re: Patches pending review
Posted by Daniel Becroft <dj...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Hyrum K Wright <hy...@hyrumwright.org>wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > See below in line more information about the patches.
> >
> > Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net> writes:
> ...
> >> 3. Issue 3690
> >>
> >> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0414.shtml
> >>
> >> This is actually an enhancement and there were two approaches. One
> >> that I initially submitted and another one suggested by Hyrum. This
> >> thread has three to four patches which are pending review. May be it
> >> is not getting reviewed because it is not yet finalized how are are
> >> we going to proceed.
> >>
> >
> > Above thread contains patches for issue 3690 which adds an option
> > "--ignore-properties" to log command so that user can ignore revisions
> > which has only property changes.
>
> I've said multiple times (both in regards to this, as well as the
> ignore-mergeinfo-log branch) that I'd appreciate some discussion
> surrounding the applicability of these features before committing
> them. Part of me sees the use, as they solve a real usability problem
> in my own life, but another part of me wonders if these are specific
> fixes for which other (non-core) solutions would be appropriate.
>
> Maybe I should spearhead that discussion, since I'm the guy who wants
> it so badly, but unfortunately my supply of tuits has been quite low
> lately. I'm just not in any rush to get this work on trunk, as if we
> do add this functionality, I'd like to do it for as many subcommands
> as is reasonable, all in the same release. And that ain't happening
> before 1.7 (imho).
>
> -Hyrum
>
My 0.02c - there was a question raised on the users@ list, regarding the
ability to see the changes that *only* relate to properties. The use case
was seeing the log for svn:externals changes on a directory.
I guess this is the opposite of the above request: one where we can exclude
all property changes, the other where we want nothing but property changes.
Cheers,
Daniel B.
Re: Patches pending review
Posted by Hyrum K Wright <hy...@hyrumwright.org>.
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net> wrote:
>
> See below in line more information about the patches.
>
> Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net> writes:
...
>> 3. Issue 3690
>>
>> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0414.shtml
>>
>> This is actually an enhancement and there were two approaches. One
>> that I initially submitted and another one suggested by Hyrum. This
>> thread has three to four patches which are pending review. May be it
>> is not getting reviewed because it is not yet finalized how are are
>> we going to proceed.
>>
>
> Above thread contains patches for issue 3690 which adds an option
> "--ignore-properties" to log command so that user can ignore revisions
> which has only property changes.
I've said multiple times (both in regards to this, as well as the
ignore-mergeinfo-log branch) that I'd appreciate some discussion
surrounding the applicability of these features before committing
them. Part of me sees the use, as they solve a real usability problem
in my own life, but another part of me wonders if these are specific
fixes for which other (non-core) solutions would be appropriate.
Maybe I should spearhead that discussion, since I'm the guy who wants
it so badly, but unfortunately my supply of tuits has been quite low
lately. I'm just not in any rush to get this work on trunk, as if we
do add this functionality, I'd like to do it for as many subcommands
as is reasonable, all in the same release. And that ain't happening
before 1.7 (imho).
-Hyrum
Re: Patches pending review
Posted by Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net>.
See below in line more information about the patches.
Noorul Islam K M <no...@collab.net> writes:
> I have been working on some issues lately but I have not got many review
> comments for the same. I have listed them below so that it gets some
> attention and I can move forward.
>
> 1. I started sending patches for
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0210.shtml long back and one
> of them got committed in r1068977. Apart from that there are two
> more patches as a follow-up to r1068977
>
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-02/0315.shtml
Subject of this thread is "[PATCH] svn command - ls - Multiple
targets". The patch does the following.
Make 'svn ls' continue processing targets after printing warning if one
or more of the targets is a non-existent URL or wc-entry. Also return a
non-zero error code and print an error message at the end in those
situations.
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0298.shtml
>
Subject of the above patch is "[PATCH] svn command - add - Multiple
targets". The patch does the following.
Make 'svn add' return a non-zero errorcode when
one or more targets fails. Also print an error message in those
situations.
> Similarly I will be submitting more once these patches are reviewed
> and committed.
>
> 2. Issue 3792
>
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-02/0061.shtml
>
> I got some review comments from Daniel and incorporated them into the
> latest version of the patch. There is another issue 3787 which is
> kind of related to this one. I thought of working on that also once
> this one gets a +1.
>
The above patch fixes issue #3792. Make svn info to display information
for excluded items.
> 3. Issue 3690
>
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0414.shtml
>
> This is actually an enhancement and there were two approaches. One
> that I initially submitted and another one suggested by Hyrum. This
> thread has three to four patches which are pending review. May be it
> is not getting reviewed because it is not yet finalized how are are
> we going to proceed.
>
Above thread contains patches for issue 3690 which adds an option
"--ignore-properties" to log command so that user can ignore revisions
which has only property changes.
Thanks and Regards
Noorul
Re: Patches pending review
Posted by Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>.
Noorul Islam K M wrote on Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 15:25:48 +0530:
> 1. I started sending patches for
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0210.shtml long back and one
> of them got committed in r1068977. Apart from that there are two
> more patches as a follow-up to r1068977
>
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-02/0315.shtml
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-01/0298.shtml
>
> Similarly I will be submitting more once these patches are reviewed
> and committed.
It would have helped if you actually said what the subject of the
patches was, instead of giving a series of issue numbers, revision
numbers, and links.