You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@subversion.apache.org by rh...@apache.org on 2013/06/03 11:49:51 UTC
svn commit: r1488943 - /subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS
Author: rhuijben
Date: Mon Jun 3 09:49:51 2013
New Revision: 1488943
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1488943
Log:
* STATUS: Cast two votes. Approve two groups
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=1488943&r1=1488942&r2=1488943&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS (original)
+++ subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS Mon Jun 3 09:49:51 2013
@@ -41,14 +41,6 @@ Candidate changes:
-0: rhuijben, breser (merge conflict in configure.ac in r1481848
<danielsh> resolved on the branch)
- * r1483575, r1483580, r1485018
- Define SVN_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_IS_OK for PowerPC.
- Justification:
- Performance for free.
- Votes:
- +1: mattiase (non-binding, not including r1485018)
- +1: breser, stefan2
-
* r1488183
Check target WC for mixed revisions, local modifications and switched
subtrees before contacting server for merge calculations.
@@ -73,13 +65,6 @@ Candidate changes:
+1: philip, rhuijben
+0: danielsh
- * 1488878
- Don't leave return value uninitialised.
- Justification:
- Possible SEGV when using legacy status API.
- Votes:
- +1: philip, brane
-
Veto-blocked changes:
=====================
@@ -94,3 +79,18 @@ Approved changes:
# that would restart the soak should not be added unless they are resolving
# blocking issues. If in doubt see this link for details:
# http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/releasing.html#release-stabilization
+
+ * r1483575, r1483580, r1485018
+ Define SVN_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_IS_OK for PowerPC.
+ Justification:
+ Performance for free.
+ Votes:
+ +1: mattiase (non-binding, not including r1485018)
+ +1: breser, stefan2, rhuijben
+
+ * 1488878
+ Don't leave return value uninitialised.
+ Justification:
+ Possible SEGV when using legacy status API.
+ Votes:
+ +1: philip, brane, rhuijben