Then we will need to purchase a certificate for that server unless Eric knows where we can get a domain named signed cert.
Kind regards / Cordialement / Mit freundlichen Grüssen Danny Danny McKinney . Senior Systems Programmer - Technology Service Management, Asset Management . SunGard DDI +01 816 460 3226 . Mob +01 816 506 9639 -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:danie...@elego.de] Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 2:04 PM To: Gabriela Gibson Cc: Subversion Development Subject: Re: [RFC] Build System Documentation Gabriela Gibson wrote on Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 14:42:15 +0000: > On 22/02/13 00:45, Daniel Shahaf wrote: >> % svn log -qv -l1 -r 1:HEAD >> subversion/tests/cmdline/atomic-ra-revprop-change.c >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> --- >> r965054 | danielsh | 2010-07-17 14:23:38 +0300 (Sat, 17 Jul 2010) >> Changed paths: >> M /subversion/branches/atomic-revprop/build.conf >> M /subversion/branches/atomic-revprop/subversion/tests/cmdline >> A >> /subversion/branches/atomic-revprop/subversion/tests/cmdline/atomic-ra-revprop-change.c >> ... >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> --- > > Thanks, I exchanged examples. I will add gtest in the same way as the > external example, once it is ready. > >> (which already shows that you forgot to show the svn:ignore property >> mods) > > I'm not sure what you mean here? > When I added atomic-ra-revprop-change.c, I would have also added 'atomic-ra-revprop-change' to svn:ignore on subversion/tests/cmdline/, so that the compiled binary (actually, the libtool wrapper script) doesn't spam 'svn status' in in-tree builds. r965054 shows that but your patch didn't. >> More accurately, "configuration files for the hudson buildslaves we >> once tried to configure". They're not part of the build system. >> > (should those files be removed from trunk/build ?) +1, assuming they are unused. Are they unused? https://builds.apache.org/ shows jobs for 1.6.x (I don't really care about their status, since the lack of 1.7.x jobs suggests those are unmaintained); jobs for trunk which fail; and javadoc and doxygen jobs which pass. So I guess the trunk and 1.6.x jobs can be removed from HEAD, but not the javadoc+doxyge jobs.
