In the interest of readability, I'm replying to an old e-mail here to summarise the discussion else-thread.
Den tors 11 dec. 2025 kl 20:43 skrev Branko Čibej <[email protected]>: > On 11. 12. 25 19:59, Daniel Sahlberg wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Prompted by Evgeny's suggestion to move forward with releasing Subversion > > 1.15.0[1], I'd like to suggest getting a new minor release of Serf out of > > the door as well - preferrably first! > > > > There are a few features in Subversion that depend on recent development > in > > Serf (for example the error reporting) and it would be nice to have it > > released together. > > > > Brane has made a summary in Jira, see SERF-208[2], open points copied > below: > > * Generalized error callbacks, discussed in [3]. From what I can see we > > have an error callback mechanism that works for SSL errors. There is also > > code in Subversion to support this. We need to decide if [a] We are happy > > with the current situation, or [b] Can someone step up to improve it. > > Personally, I'm leaning towards [a]. > > I'm not happy with the current custom callback just for SSL errors. I'd > be -0.9 to release it as a public API. I sort of dropped the ball . > Work is ongoing, with some committed to the repository and some still in progress (including the earlier mail from Brane with a patch). It seems we should be able to get this done not too far into the future. > > > * Issue SERF-195, which is a substantial rewrite of the request queues. > The > > code is in a separate branch SERF-195. The code looks good to me but I > > haven't analyzed in detail. It should be possible to merge to trunk. > > The patch works, in the sense that it causes no regressions, but I > haven't been able to reproduce the reported issue. It's also makes the > code slightly more readable, but I couldn't find the mentioned race > condition during review, it looks like just a refactoring of the > original code. > > I think we need another pair of eyes to do a careful review of the > branch changes. > I have removed SERF-195 from the checklist as per consensus else-thread. > > > * Issue SERF-209, concerning intermitent test suite failures under > MacOS. I > > would suggest to leave this aside for later. > > Yes, it's not critical. Might be something in the test code itself, > i.e., not related to serf proper. > > Can we get these decided/merged and roll a release? I think it would be > > good to do this in trunk before branching. > FWIW: I've just rebuilt TortoiseSVN based on Serf trunk and the 1.15.x branch of Subversion (with SVN__SERF_EXPERIMENTAL and SVN__SERF_TEST_HTTP2 to let Subversion use some new Serf features. Build went fine and some initial tests (checkout, commit) also worked as expected. I'll use this on my work laptop for a few days to test out Cheers, Daniel > > > > Kind regards, > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > > [1]https://lists.apache.org/thread/x0s1c8jolql5hdkq40jm3jfnpm6wjp9s > > [2]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SERF-208 > > [3]https://lists.apache.org/thread/7khn697o2srmg8wvqy4t3xyxq4cr8v8v > > >
