On 18 October 2011 17:53, Philip Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > sebb <[email protected]> writes: > >> In that case, either that is an insufficient check, or the upgrade >> fails to act correctly on the results of the check. > > In what way? The upgrade detected the problem, stopped the upgrade and > left the 1.6 working copy unchanged apart from some files in .svn/tmp.
I've obviously misunderstood some of the postings then. I thought there were some reports (in other threads) of issues after the upgrade completed. > -- > Philip >
