On 09.05.2017 15:25, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 01:39:49PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 11:38:51AM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:54:20AM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
% svnadmin load r2 < dump
<<< Started new transaction, ba
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:48:03PM +0200, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> If needed, admins
> can (re-)enable rep-sharing for an existing repository (as long as a
> collision hasn't been committed yet), right?
Sure. However, any content committed while rep-sharing was
disabled will not be considered duri
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 12:27:40PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote:
> From the best I can tell we have no plan on how or when we could support
> this in the working copy. I have also seen a lot of people express
> interest in the hook scripts to block the sha1 collisions and not any real
> conversation
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 03:44:22PM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> > Stefan Sperling wrote on Tue, May 09, 2017 at 15:25:23 +0200:
>> > > This could be further extended by the confi
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 03:44:22PM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Stefan Sperling wrote on Tue, May 09, 2017 at 15:25:23 +0200:
> > > This could be further extended by the config knob to give users a
> choice.
> > > I don't see a good way
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 03:44:22PM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote on Tue, May 09, 2017 at 15:25:23 +0200:
> > This could be further extended by the config knob to give users a choice.
> > I don't see a good way of adding such a knob in a patch release, though.
>
> Just give th
Stefan Sperling wrote on Tue, May 09, 2017 at 15:25:23 +0200:
> This could be further extended by the config knob to give users a choice.
> I don't see a good way of adding such a knob in a patch release, though.
Just give the knob a name that indicates it's not forward compatible?
For illustrati
+1 on rejection.
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>
>> On IRC, Branko and Johan raised concerns about the proposed backport.
>>
>> The proposed backport allows files with SHA1 collisions into the
>> repository
>> and a
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On IRC, Branko and Johan raised concerns about the proposed backport.
>
> The proposed backport allows files with SHA1 collisions into the repository
> and avoids de-duplication of such content by the rep-cache. It fixes the
> integrity pro
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 01:39:49PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 11:38:51AM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:54:20AM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > > % svnadmin load r2 < dump
> > > <<< Started new transaction, based on original revision 1
> >
10 matches
Mail list logo
