On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 07:21:15PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: > I am just questioning the usefulness of halting the presses and restarting > the soak for another month for something that isn't a security / data > corruption issue. I anticipate that problems of similar severity to this > one will still be discovered after we release 1.10.0, regardless of > whether we release 1.10.0 at end of March or later. > > Though maybe my idea of the impact of this bug is wrong? > If this really makes some repositories entirely unusable with authz enabled > then of course it should be considered a blocker. Is it this severe?
I have misread our flowchart at: http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/svn-soak-management.png It seems for this kind of issue we'd extend soak by just one week instead of four? I wouldn't mind a one-week extension for this kind of bug fix. One week seems reasonable.
