Hi, yes, both are quite similar, and your additional changes look reasonable as well,
I tried to do a stab at adjusting subversion-plugin to use the new svnkit and also to provide a 1.8 selection box in the configuration, however I failed there as the constants that were used for 1.7 do not exist for 1.8, it seems svnkit did change somewhat more and it requires more work to switch... Dominik. On Monday, December 2, 2013 6:48:42 PM UTC+1, [email protected] wrote: > > I reviewed my master branch versus your master. 5 different files, mostly > stylized changes around star imports, line spacing or in the test namespace. > > Only significant difference was SVNPath.java > 112,115d111 > < if (revStr.startsWith("r")) { > < //TODO: should we put this code to SVNRevision#parse? > < revStr = revStr.substring("r".length()); > < } > > The other difference is I added platform independent profiles to the pom > file and you added a compiler plugin declaration. > > -jtp > > > On Friday, November 29, 2013 2:36:32 PM UTC-6, Dominik Stadler wrote: >> >> Hi, I started the same work, see https://github.com/centic9/svnkit, in >> my fork there is a separate branch "incoming-1.8.x" which contains the pure >> 1.8.0. version, however I did a manual integration, so the svnkit-history >> is not visible, so yours is better... >> >> According to the download-page of svnkit, the newer version will not work >> with 1.7 working copy any more, thus requiring all existing checkouts to be >> upgraded, I am not sure what tihs means to the plugin, if it should >> automatically upgrade working copies or should refuse to work on such >> working copy versions? >> >> Dominik. >> >> On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 5:09:45 PM UTC+1, >> [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> I took a stab at upgrading Jenkins SVNKit to merge in the recently >>> released 1.8.0 SVNkit. Possibly even ok for a pull request. >>> https://github.com/electrawn/svnkit >>> >>> I then took a look at upgrading the Subversion plugin to handle the new >>> SVNkit. It looks like pre 1.6 SVN working copies matched underlying SVN >>> working copy format numbers. Then at 1.7 the number jumps inexplicably to >>> 100 and there seem to be certain kludges to get working copies working with >>> 1.7. >>> >>> What is the level of effort (LOE) to introduce 1.8 without breaking 1.7 >>> functionality? This seems a bit more complex than altering one jelly file. >>> >>> *Jason Potkanski* >>> >>> Release Manager >>> >>> *ACQUITY GROUP * >>> >>> Part of Accenture Interactive >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
