You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Ivan Zhakov <iv...@visualsvn.com> on 2015/02/17 12:16:03 UTC
Re: svn commit: r1660342 - /subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
On 17 February 2015 at 13:24, <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> Author: stefan2
> Date: Tue Feb 17 10:24:09 2015
> New Revision: 1660342
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1660342
> Log:
> * STATUS: Refer to new backport branch for r1590751 and unblock
> that entry.
>
> Modified:
> subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
>
> Modified: subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS?rev=1660342&r1=1660341&r2=1660342&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS (original)
> +++ subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS Tue Feb 17 10:24:09 2015
> @@ -133,6 +133,21 @@ Candidate changes:
> Votes:
> +1: rhuijben
>
> + * r1590751, r1660341
> + Use empty, rather than NULL, config if default is unreadable.
> + Justification:
> + svn SEGV reported by user.
> + Branch:
> + ^/subversion/branches/1.8.x-r1590751
> + Votes:
> + +1 (without r1660341): philip, danielsh, rhuijben
> + -0: julianfoad (prefer to fix all the programs at the same time;
> + other queries -- see email thread)
> + +1 (without r1660341): danielsh (julianf:
> + I agree with your points on list, but +1ing anyway:
> + fixing this segfault in svn need not block on fixing
> + a similar segfault in svnadmin.)
> +
> Veto-blocked changes:
> =====================
>
> @@ -162,20 +177,6 @@ Veto-blocked changes:
> +1: rhuijben, stefan2
> -1: julianfoad (assertion failure on incomplete dir -- see email)
>
> - * r1590751
> - Use empty, rather than NULL, config if default is unreadable.
> - Justification:
> - svn SEGV reported by user.
> - Votes:
> - +1: philip, danielsh, rhuijben
> - -0: julianfoad (prefer to fix all the programs at the same time;
> - other queries -- see email thread)
> - +1: danielsh (julianf: I agree with your points on list, but +1ing anyway:
> - fixing this segfault in svn need not block on fixing
> - a similar segfault in svnadmin.)
> - -1: kotkov (breaks the build on Windows -- should use SVN_INT_ERR()
> - instead of SVN_ERR())
Stefan!
Nevertheless that someone can consider this as a minor issue, you
can't just go around removing people's votes. [1]
You may resolve it, but you have to wait for person who raised the
veto to withdrawn it once he review and test proposed solution. We
already have discussed this in the past [2]
[1] http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html#Veto
[2] http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2014-08/0090.shtml
--
Ivan Zhakov
Re: svn commit: r1660342 - /subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com>.
On 17.02.2015 12:16, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> On 17 February 2015 at 13:24, <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Author: stefan2
>> Date: Tue Feb 17 10:24:09 2015
>> New Revision: 1660342
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1660342
>> Log:
>> * STATUS: Refer to new backport branch for r1590751 and unblock
>> that entry.
>>
>> Modified:
>> subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
>>
>> Modified: subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS?rev=1660342&r1=1660341&r2=1660342&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS (original)
>> +++ subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS Tue Feb 17 10:24:09 2015
>> @@ -133,6 +133,21 @@ Candidate changes:
>> Votes:
>> +1: rhuijben
>>
>> + * r1590751, r1660341
>> + Use empty, rather than NULL, config if default is unreadable.
>> + Justification:
>> + svn SEGV reported by user.
>> + Branch:
>> + ^/subversion/branches/1.8.x-r1590751
>> + Votes:
>> + +1 (without r1660341): philip, danielsh, rhuijben
>> + -0: julianfoad (prefer to fix all the programs at the same time;
>> + other queries -- see email thread)
>> + +1 (without r1660341): danielsh (julianf:
>> + I agree with your points on list, but +1ing anyway:
>> + fixing this segfault in svn need not block on fixing
>> + a similar segfault in svnadmin.)
>> +
>> Veto-blocked changes:
>> =====================
>>
>> @@ -162,20 +177,6 @@ Veto-blocked changes:
>> +1: rhuijben, stefan2
>> -1: julianfoad (assertion failure on incomplete dir -- see email)
>>
>> - * r1590751
>> - Use empty, rather than NULL, config if default is unreadable.
>> - Justification:
>> - svn SEGV reported by user.
>> - Votes:
>> - +1: philip, danielsh, rhuijben
>> - -0: julianfoad (prefer to fix all the programs at the same time;
>> - other queries -- see email thread)
>> - +1: danielsh (julianf: I agree with your points on list, but +1ing anyway:
>> - fixing this segfault in svn need not block on fixing
>> - a similar segfault in svnadmin.)
>> - -1: kotkov (breaks the build on Windows -- should use SVN_INT_ERR()
>> - instead of SVN_ERR())
> Stefan!
>
> Nevertheless that someone can consider this as a minor issue, you
> can't just go around removing people's votes. [1]
>
> You may resolve it, but you have to wait for person who raised the
> veto to withdrawn it once he review and test proposed solution. We
> already have discussed this in the past [2]
>
> [1] http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html#Veto
> [2] http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2014-08/0090.shtml
Indeed. Faux pas there. Please keep the veto in until Evgeny decides to
change his vote.
-- Brane
Re: svn commit: r1660342 - /subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
Posted by Stefan Fuhrmann <st...@wandisco.com>.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Ivan Zhakov <iv...@visualsvn.com> wrote:
> On 17 February 2015 at 13:24, <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Author: stefan2
> > Date: Tue Feb 17 10:24:09 2015
> > New Revision: 1660342
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1660342
> > Log:
> > * STATUS: Refer to new backport branch for r1590751 and unblock
> > that entry.
> >
> > Modified:
> > subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
> >
> > Modified: subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
> > URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS?rev=1660342&r1=1660341&r2=1660342&view=diff
> >
> ==============================================================================
> > --- subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS (original)
> > +++ subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS Tue Feb 17 10:24:09 2015
> > @@ -133,6 +133,21 @@ Candidate changes:
> > Votes:
> > +1: rhuijben
> >
> > + * r1590751, r1660341
> > + Use empty, rather than NULL, config if default is unreadable.
> > + Justification:
> > + svn SEGV reported by user.
> > + Branch:
> > + ^/subversion/branches/1.8.x-r1590751
> > + Votes:
> > + +1 (without r1660341): philip, danielsh, rhuijben
> > + -0: julianfoad (prefer to fix all the programs at the same time;
> > + other queries -- see email thread)
> > + +1 (without r1660341): danielsh (julianf:
> > + I agree with your points on list, but +1ing anyway:
> > + fixing this segfault in svn need not block on
> fixing
> > + a similar segfault in svnadmin.)
> > +
> > Veto-blocked changes:
> > =====================
> >
> > @@ -162,20 +177,6 @@ Veto-blocked changes:
> > +1: rhuijben, stefan2
> > -1: julianfoad (assertion failure on incomplete dir -- see email)
> >
> > - * r1590751
> > - Use empty, rather than NULL, config if default is unreadable.
> > - Justification:
> > - svn SEGV reported by user.
> > - Votes:
> > - +1: philip, danielsh, rhuijben
> > - -0: julianfoad (prefer to fix all the programs at the same time;
> > - other queries -- see email thread)
> > - +1: danielsh (julianf: I agree with your points on list, but +1ing
> anyway:
> > - fixing this segfault in svn need not block on
> fixing
> > - a similar segfault in svnadmin.)
> > - -1: kotkov (breaks the build on Windows -- should use SVN_INT_ERR()
> > - instead of SVN_ERR())
> Stefan!
>
> Nevertheless that someone can consider this as a minor issue, you
> can't just go around removing people's votes. [1]
>
> You may resolve it, but you have to wait for person who raised the
> veto to withdrawn it once he review and test proposed solution. We
> already have discussed this in the past [2]
>
Sorry about that! Bad commit day :/
After the backport branch mess this morning, I refrained from making
any further commits today.
-- Stefan^2.