Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

And figure > > out some details. > > Will that be Subversion 18.04 Anticlimactic Albatross? > > > -- Brane > -- Jacek Materna Chief Technology Officer Assembla +1 210 410 7661

Re: How to manage PR's (was: [GitHub] subversion pull request #6: VC should be 14.1 and not 15.0)

> > > > > If you ask people comfortable with donating code via PR to email patches > > (or similar) to dev@ instead, you'll get a 1/100th contribution rate. Or > > worse. > > > > There's no easy answer. > > Couldn't some automated process mail PRs from github as (--git) diffs to > dev@? > -- Jacek Materna Chief Technology Officer Assembla +1 210 410 7661

Re: [RFC] Using LZ4 compression by default

that make LZ4 the new default compression > algorithm, I think that option (2) is better. The reasoning here is that > using LZ4 compression would improve the performance even for existing > repositories by making new commits faster and by speeding up read > operations for the new committed files. Apart from this, option (3) > needs implementation and is probably going to have a couple of related > challenges, which can be otherwise avoided. > > With all that in mind, I propose that we do (2). Any objections? > > > Thanks, > Evgeny Kotkov > -- Jacek Materna Chief Technology Officer Assembla +1 210 410 7661

Re: Giving 1.10 alpha more exposure to gather feedback

PM, Andreas Stieger > <andreas.stie...@gmx.de> wrote: >> The openSUSE project has 1.10 alpha3 binaries ready for all current >> openSUSE and SUSE Linux Enterprise distributions. >> >> https://software.opensuse.org//download.html?project=home%3AAndreasStieger%3Abranches%3Adevel%3Atools%3Ascm%3Asvn=subversion >> >> Andreas > > Great, thanks Andreas! > > -- > Johan -- Jacek Materna Chief Technology Officer Assembla +1 210 410 7661

Re: [RFC] Using LZ4 compression by default

ignificant for large repos. Is it feasible to > get the best of both worlds by using LZ4 for fast commits and then > recompress using zlib in svnadmin pack? -- Jacek Materna Chief Technology Officer Assembla +1 210 410 7661

Re: svn commit: r1801940 - in /subversion/trunk: ./ notes/ subversion/include/ subversion/include/private/ subversion/libsvn_delta/ subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/ subversion/libsvn_subr/ subversion/tests/li

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 6:39 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Good morning Evgeny, > > First of all, thanks for the well written response. > > Evgeny Kotkov wrote on Mon, 24 Jul 2017 19:19 +0300: >> Daniel Shahaf writes: >> > I'm a bit uncomfortable

Re: Big files PUT into Subversion - encountering

ch can be acceptable >> for temp folders – but never for backend storage, of course). >> >> >> >> And I also guess the speed difference is more siginificant if there are >> several concurrent accesses, so the I/O operations overlap. A single SVN >> backend

Re: Proposal: new fsfs.conf properties

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: > > On 13.07.2017 04:07, Paul Hammant wrote: > >> I flipped _back_ to Python's requests.put(..) in my solution - from a > >> regular Svn client.

Re: [PATCH] Tweak the SHA-1 FAQ entry

Fair enough! Rest looks great. -- Jacek Materna Assembla CTO +1 210 410 7661 +48 578 296 708 Sent from my Mobile Device > On Jul 7, 2017, at 5:47 PM, Evgeny Kotkov <evgeny.kot...@visualsvn.com> wrote: > > Jacek Materna <ja...@assembla.com> writes: > >> Shoul

Re: [PATCH] Tweak the SHA-1 FAQ entry

th colliding SHA-1 hash values, we suggest you transform it > via gzip before committing it to avoid the collision altogether. Moreover, > an upgrade to 1.9.6 to prevent future insertion of duplicates is highly > recommended. > ]]] > > > Regards, > Evgeny Kotkov -- Jacek Materna CTO Assembla +1 210 410 7661 +48 578 296 708

Re: Expected speed of commit over HTTP?

ave it tuned the max via the metrics above. Most of the real world use cases require the default settings so curl, etc isn't seen a lot in the wild. Overall Dav and http is a poor transport in general for SVN. Hope it helps. -- Jacek Materna Assembla CTO +1 210 410 7661 +48 578 296 708

Re: Expected speed of commit over HTTP?

ible deltas at all, > doesn't mean that Svn doesn't attempt to make its own determination. I > wasn't using .bin suffixes as it happens but I'll bet there's something in > amongst mimetypes and suffixes somewhere that allows skipping. > > -ph > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 8:07 AM, J

Re: Expected speed of commit over HTTP?

_dav --> mod_dav_svn handoff does > the 512MB temporarily manifest itself in a file system on the way to its > ultimate destination? Is 1/10th speed the expectation? Sure, I get that > 7bit/8bit shenanigans are a factor, but not that much right? > > - Paul > > -- Jacek Materna CTO Assembla +1 210 410 7661 +48 578 296 708

Dates for 1.10

Is there a general GA or BETA timeframe/date on the roadmap for the 1.10 rls? Trying to understand timeline. thanks-

Re: Check SHA vs Content (was: RE: svn commit: r1759233 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/questions.c)

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:33 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 09:05:25AM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:

Re: [PATCH] 1.10 Release notes and FAQ around SHA-1

On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann <stefanfuhrm...@alice-dsl.de> wrote: > On 09.05.2017 20:43, Stefan Sperling wrote: >> >> On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 10:46:39AM +0200, Jacek Materna wrote: >>> >>> Team, >>> >>> I wanted

Re: beta@ feedback mailing list?

tacking this topic around work flow preservation. Thanks Daniel. On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Jacek Materna <ja...@assembla.com> wrote: >> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Stefan Sperling &l

Re: beta@ feedback mailing list?

? > > They use github :) On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Jacek Materna <ja...@assembla.com> wrote: >> Just observing from afar, in my opinion the root of what you are >> trying to achieve here t

Re: [PATCH] 1.10 Release notes and FAQ around SHA-1

For review. best. -j On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Jacek Materna <ja...@assembla.com> wrote: > Correct. #2 is moot given the rejection strategy moving forward. > > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> > wrote: >> >> Jace

Re: [PATCH] 1.10 Release notes and FAQ around SHA-1

Correct. #2 is moot given the rejection strategy moving forward. On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote: > Jacek Materna wrote on Tue, May 09, 2017 at 14:39:51 +0200: > > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.sh

Re: [PATCH] 1.10 Release notes and FAQ around SHA-1

Looks great Stefan - will review and work on the FAQ patch this week. On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: > On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 10:46:39AM +0200, Jacek Materna wrote: > > Team, > > > > I wanted to start a discussion around t

Re: [PATCH] reject SHA1 collisions (was: Re: Progress on SHA-1 fixes in patch releases?)

t; > > > -- > Thanks > > Mark Phippard > http://markphip.blogspot.com/ -- Jacek Materna CTO Assembla 210-410-7661

Re: beta@ feedback mailing list?

ion focused around beta-testing 1.10 (in that case, maybe we > should call the next 1.10 pre-release a "beta" instead of an "alpha" > -- otherwise the announcement on our website might be a bit weird: > "Subversion 1.10 alpha 3 has been released. Please test and report > your feedback on beta-users@s.a.o" :-)) > > -- > Johan -- Jacek Materna CTO Assembla 210-410-7661

Re: [PATCH] 1.10 Release notes and FAQ around SHA-1

Hi, On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote: > Jacek Materna wrote on Mon, May 08, 2017 at 10:46:39 +0200: >> Team, >> >> I wanted to start a discussion around the FAQ (and 1.10 rls. notes) as it >> pertains to the SHA-1 issue

Re: stricter text conflicts in 1.10

have become a lot more painful > than they used to be. I don't think this is going to be a good sell. -- Jacek Materna CTO Assembla 210-410-7661

[PATCH] 1.10 Release notes and FAQ around SHA-1

inst known collisions. While this will not guarantee protection from new collisions, we will keep the hook up-to date as new collisions are publicly released. The hook can be found here: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/tools/hook-scripts/reject-known-sha1-collisions.sh <<<<<<<< Best. -- Jacek Materna CTO Assembla 210-410-7661

Re: Continue the 1.10 alphas?

Great! Will do - thanks for the guidance- -j On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Jacek Materna <ja...@assembla.com> wrote: > > Agreed - let me looking in Stefan's mods - I can take a look at the

Re: Continue the 1.10 alphas?

il.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Jacek Materna <ja...@assembla.com> wrote: > > Great to hear on 1.10 move along. > > > > On SHA1 I can help if you feel it may move things along in parallel - we > > ended up having to use the pre-commit hook for ou

Re: Continue the 1.10 alphas?

r focus again on releasing 1.10, and > > get the improvements it brings in the hands of users. > > I agree! > > I was one of the people pushing for more SHA1 fixes but I did not find > time to do any of that work myself. I will not object if we decide that > these changes will have to happen later on. We do not seem to have enough > resources to push more SHA1 fixes through right now. So let's do whatever > else we can get done instead. > -- Jacek Materna CTO Assembla 210-410-7661