Mladen Turk wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
THIS IS CAUSED BY USER ERROR, AND NOT BY A PROBLEM WITH SUBVERSION OR
OUR CONFIGURATION.
Then you might put that somewhere inside www.apache.org/dev
One note:
Sorry, seems it was caused by the Tortoise SVN client.
It has an option to 'Get Lock' on t
Paul Querna wrote:
If you think svn is correct in sending lock/unlock/proppatch mails for
each individual file ( without at least agreggating them ) - then
It was done separately BECAUSE it was not done in a SINGLE ATOMIC COMMIT.
THIS IS CAUSED BY USER ERROR, AND NOT BY A PROBLEM WITH SUBVER
Costin Manolache wrote:
I'm pretty sure Mladen didn't intentionally do a 'svn lock/unlock' on each
file. Maybe his IDE did - he can
comment on what commands he used to perform the operation.
$> svn lock trunk
$> svn propset ...
$> svn unlock trunk
Changing a property on all files in a repos
I'm pretty sure Mladen didn't intentionally do a 'svn lock/unlock' on each
file. Maybe his IDE did - he can
comment on what commands he used to perform the operation.
However, I don't see any reason for svn to send a mail whenever a file is
locked or unlocked - the
purpose ( AFAIK ) is to allow r
Good to hear from infrastructure@ !
We all agree that the svn lock/svn unlock traffic was a bad thing, and
even worse that 2 mails were sent for each file in the repository.
AFAIK this is result of changing a simple property in the tomcat repository
( for
line ending ), and it's a serious bug in
