You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com> on 2007/09/16 16:33:00 UTC
[PATCH] Neon 0.27.1 released
Neon 0.27.1 was released today and fixes regression in response progress counter for notifier/progress callbacks.
I installed it and it works correctly.
Please add this version to NEON_ALLOWED_LIST.
[[[
Allow Neon 0.27.1.
* configure.in
(NEON_ALLOWED_LIST): Add 0.27.1 to the list.
Patch by: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>
]]]
--
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
Re: [PATCH] Neon 0.27.1 released
Posted by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
2007-09-16 18:48:30 Max Bowsher napisał(a):
> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> > Neon 0.27.1 was released today and fixes regression in response progress counter for notifier/progress callbacks.
> > I installed it and it works correctly.
> > Please add this version to NEON_ALLOWED_LIST.
> >
> > [[[
> > Allow Neon 0.27.1.
> >
> > * configure.in
> > (NEON_ALLOWED_LIST): Add 0.27.1 to the list.
> >
> > Patch by: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>
> > ]]]
>
> Is there a reason to allow 0.27.1 but not 0.27.0? (ok, it has a
> regression, but it doesn't sound like a fatal one).
I'm not sure.
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2007-08/0521.shtml
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2007-08/0530.shtml
> Also, is there any reason for our configure script to continue
> recommending a specific Neon version when it finds none?
Maybe we should automatically recommend the newest version contained in
NEON_ALLOWED_LIST.
- --
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFG7W1u/axNJ4Xo/ZERAp80AKCxzHgaKyq9dKmfYzIqKhmv8DtPFQCfSrr+
YpY7MVMn5LFO84hNXTVgt+0=
=jt7d
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] Neon 0.27.1 released
Posted by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
2007-09-17 20:58:28 Daniel Rall napisał(a):
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Malcolm Rowe wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
> > > Is there a reason to allow 0.27.1 but not 0.27.0? (ok, it has a
> > > regression, but it doesn't sound like a fatal one).
> >
> > I don't believe so, no.
>
> Haven't we had reports of various versions of Neon having trouble with
> GSSPI auth? IIRC, TortoiseSVN ships with vary specific versions of
> Neon and/or compilation options to avoid these problems.
OK. So choose any version of my patch.
- --
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFG7s9w/axNJ4Xo/ZERAndUAKCrFu7wAPTOtTxxRYCL5Bty64MRqQCcCZFJ
XOfn8EzCoKwtwjbpgsdmInA=
=8i84
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] Neon 0.27.1 released
Posted by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
2007-09-20 20:54:31 Daniel Rall napisał(a):
> I added the 0.27.1-only patch in r26711.
Thanks!
- --
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFG8tZ5/axNJ4Xo/ZERAlYSAJ0VxPRDhYNefRyN7+JKjIDVvcDEtgCfXWl+
uxURqo3YrqTBscWB1LMd2mA=
=Jqxg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: [PATCH] Neon 0.27.1 released
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@collab.net>.
I added the 0.27.1-only patch in r26711.
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm still happily using Neon 0.27.1.
>
> I don't know what you prefer, so I'm attaching 2 patches.
> Please choose one of them :) .
>
> [[[
> Allow Neon 0.27.1.
>
> * configure.in
> (NEON_ALLOWED_LIST): Add 0.27.1 to the list.
>
> Patch by: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>
> ]]]
>
> OR
>
> [[[
> Allow Neon 0.27.0 and 0.27.1.
>
> * configure.in
> (NEON_ALLOWED_LIST): Add 0.27.0 and 0.27.1 to the list.
>
> Patch by: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>
> ]]]
>
> --
> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
Re: [PATCH] Neon 0.27.1 released
Posted by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
I'm still happily using Neon 0.27.1.
I don't know what you prefer, so I'm attaching 2 patches.
Please choose one of them :) .
[[[
Allow Neon 0.27.1.
* configure.in
(NEON_ALLOWED_LIST): Add 0.27.1 to the list.
Patch by: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>
]]]
OR
[[[
Allow Neon 0.27.0 and 0.27.1.
* configure.in
(NEON_ALLOWED_LIST): Add 0.27.0 and 0.27.1 to the list.
Patch by: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>
]]]
--
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
Re: [PATCH] Neon 0.27.1 released
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@collab.net>.
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Malcolm Rowe wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
> > Is there a reason to allow 0.27.1 but not 0.27.0? (ok, it has a
> > regression, but it doesn't sound like a fatal one).
>
> I don't believe so, no.
Haven't we had reports of various versions of Neon having trouble with
GSSPI auth? IIRC, TortoiseSVN ships with vary specific versions of
Neon and/or compilation options to avoid these problems.
> > For that matter, assuming I volunteered to do the shell/m4 work, is
> > there any known reason not to accept Neon 0.25.anything, 0.26.anything
> > and 0.27.anything ?
>
> Again, no. From what I recall, we have in the past needed to blacklist
> specific patch levels of Neon -- but not for a long time (since I've
> been involved in Subversion). I think the current per-patch whitelist
> is simply a historical leftover that we can remove now.
Sounds like we actually want a blacklist, which can be overridden with
'configure --disable-neon-version-check'.
> > Also, is there any reason for our configure script to continue
> > recommending a specific Neon version when it finds none? I'm not aware
> > of Neon being unstable enough to justify us pointing to the main
> > download page and letting people pick the latest?
> >
>
> Likewise: probably not any more.
>
> Now, Serf, on the other hand... ;-)
Yup, we want a to retaina "recommend versions" list here. ;-)
Re: [PATCH] Neon 0.27.1 released
Posted by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>.
So here's the updated patch which also adds 0.27.0 to the list.
[[[
Allow Neon 0.27.0 and 0.27.1.
* configure.in
(NEON_ALLOWED_LIST): Add 0.27.0 and 0.27.1 to the list.
Patch by: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>
]]]
--
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
Re: [PATCH] Neon 0.27.1 released
Posted by Malcolm Rowe <ma...@farside.org.uk>.
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
> Is there a reason to allow 0.27.1 but not 0.27.0? (ok, it has a
> regression, but it doesn't sound like a fatal one).
>
I don't believe so, no.
> For that matter, assuming I volunteered to do the shell/m4 work, is
> there any known reason not to accept Neon 0.25.anything, 0.26.anything
> and 0.27.anything ?
Again, no. From what I recall, we have in the past needed to blacklist
specific patch levels of Neon -- but not for a long time (since I've
been involved in Subversion). I think the current per-patch whitelist
is simply a historical leftover that we can remove now.
> Also, is there any reason for our configure script to continue
> recommending a specific Neon version when it finds none? I'm not aware
> of Neon being unstable enough to justify us pointing to the main
> download page and letting people pick the latest?
>
Likewise: probably not any more.
Now, Serf, on the other hand... ;-)
Regards,
Malcolm
Re: [PATCH] Neon 0.27.1 released
Posted by Max Bowsher <ma...@ukf.net>.
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> Neon 0.27.1 was released today and fixes regression in response progress counter for notifier/progress callbacks.
> I installed it and it works correctly.
> Please add this version to NEON_ALLOWED_LIST.
>
> [[[
> Allow Neon 0.27.1.
>
> * configure.in
> (NEON_ALLOWED_LIST): Add 0.27.1 to the list.
>
> Patch by: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <ar...@gmail.com>
> ]]]
Is there a reason to allow 0.27.1 but not 0.27.0? (ok, it has a
regression, but it doesn't sound like a fatal one).
For that matter, assuming I volunteered to do the shell/m4 work, is
there any known reason not to accept Neon 0.25.anything, 0.26.anything
and 0.27.anything ?
Also, is there any reason for our configure script to continue
recommending a specific Neon version when it finds none? I'm not aware
of Neon being unstable enough to justify us pointing to the main
download page and letting people pick the latest?
Max.