Re: Unexpected Externals behaviour in working copy

2010-03-12 Thread neels
I attached a script that illustrates externals behaviour. I tested with 1.6.x. ~Neels > > This seems to be related to Subversion issue #3351 (although that issue only > relates to file externals, not folder externals). > > It is seems that a fresh check out is required. Or is it ok to del

Re: svn diff ignores externals

2010-03-12 Thread neels
last version (I am running AFAIK subversion never stepped into externals folders, did it? If you want an svn command to run in the externals folder, you have to step into it (or supply it on the cmdline explicitly) ~Neels > 1.6.9) completely ignores external_1 and external_2 and give a

Re: 1.7.0 upgrade doesn't properly follow svn:externals

2011-09-09 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
#x27;.' Upgraded 'B' Upgraded 'C' Upgraded 'XB' Upgraded 'B/XC' ]]] And note that a .svn dir remains in XB/XC (seen in the final 'ls') I'll see if I can find a solution. ~Neels #!/usr/bin/env bash ## TO MAKE THIS RUN YOUR CUSTOM COMPILED

Re: Apparent "svn rm" scaling problem in 1.7.x

2011-11-02 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
the > svnbench tool with results for 1.7.0 compared with 1.6.17. The results I > can find are only comparing 1.7.x with trunk. Just wondering if those tests > show a problem with rm so that we can track progress via those tests. > > Adding Neels in case he archived any results. H

Re: Apparent "svn rm" scaling problem in 1.7.x

2011-11-02 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
On 11/02/2011 03:46 PM, Mark Phippard wrote: > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Neels J Hofmeyr <mailto:ne...@elego.de>> wrote: > > > It seems to show an improvement on 'svn delete' for 1.7.0. > > > Yep, I noticed that. FWIW, the benchmarks that

Re: Problems during merge

2010-02-11 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
k echo 'this is file foo' > trunk/foo svn add trunk/foo svn commit -m "revision 1" etc. (Assuming that you are on a unix-like box, or that you are using cygwin) Thanks, ~Neels Christoph Bartoschek wrote: > Hi, > > after a

Re: commit templates

2010-02-11 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
on's listing of modified files in there. But there is currently no way to tell Subversion to use a given commit message template. Might be a nice feature to add, as a per-user configuration option probably. Patches welcome! This would be the place: trunk/subversion/svn/util.c: svn_cl__get_log_message() ~Neels signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Fwd: Serving internal SVN path via Apache

2010-02-11 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
main.server/repos/sub/folder/proja. Not sure if there will be side problems appearing. Technically, the user is then via mod_rewrite not able to ask for URLs other than below proja/, while the repository would still allow that if any got through. It's hacky ;) Not sure if there's a be

WC in file system root -- was: Re: '.' is not a working copy error and resolution (on users@)

2010-02-11 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
py" code. I can reproduce that having an .svn folder in the file system root (on a linux) causes a Segmentation Fault upon 'svn status', but *only* when using trunk. The current 1.6 version does not error, though I did not try to commit. Use Subversion trunk to reproduce: [[[ cd /tmp svn co

Re: Fwd: Serving internal SVN path via Apache

2010-02-11 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
Itamar O wrote: > Thanks Neels, > Just tried that. > When accessing svn.proja.com <http://svn.proja.com> from a browser it > worked fine. > But checkout & list on svn.proja.com <http://svn.proja.com> failed with > the message: > "/svn/projA/!svn/vcc/defa

Re: Problems during merge

2010-02-11 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
Christoph Bartoschek wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 11. Februar 2010 schrieb Neels J Hofmeyr: >> Hi Christoph, >> >> it would be nice if you could provide a way to reproduce this issue. I am >> aware that this can be some work, and we would highly appreciate it. :) > >

Re: Serving internal SVN path via Apache

2010-02-11 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
t, yes. I think the point was that there is one large combined repository, not separate ones... ~Neels > > That's how I set it up on my sites. > > Cheers, > Sebastian signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Will upgrade from 1.6 to 1.7 benifit from dump/reload?

2010-02-22 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
you to obliterate revisions, but we don't know that yet. Anyone else know of a particular server side improvement planned for 1.7? (I'm rather ignorant, really) ~Neels signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Will upgrade from 1.6 to 1.7 benifit from dump/reload?

2010-02-22 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
(I'm not 100% certain but that's how I understood the conversations so far. Please correct me if I'm wrong.) ~Neels Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Neels J Hofmeyr wrote on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 at 13:34 +0100: >> Johan, I think this mail should have been sent to users@ instead. I am >&

Re: Will upgrade from 1.6 to 1.7 benifit from dump/reload?

2010-02-23 Thread Neels J Hofmeyr
Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Neels J Hofmeyr wrote on Mon, 22 Feb 2010 at 18:37 +0100: >> About SHA1 on the 1.6 server: the point really is that we need to >> communicate those SHA1 checksums to the client and back. Those API > > Communicate to the client? Eh? If those are the s