Re: svn commit: r1794632 - /subversion/trunk/notes/sha1-advisory.txt

Daniel Shahaf wrote on Thu, May 11, 2017 at 05:20:53 +: > Johan Corveleyn wrote on Thu, May 11, 2017 at 01:34:18 +0200: > > Maybe something like this? > > > > "Subversion repositories can be broken, becoming partly inaccessible, > > by committing two files which have different content, yet

Re: svn commit: r1794632 - /subversion/trunk/notes/sha1-advisory.txt

Stefan Sperling wrote on Wed, May 10, 2017 at 13:34:07 +0200: > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:11:50AM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > > Details: > > > > > > > > > In February 2017 a group of researchers released two PDF files which > > > have > > > different content but produce the

Re: svn commit: r1794632 - /subversion/trunk/notes/sha1-advisory.txt

Johan Corveleyn wrote on Thu, May 11, 2017 at 01:34:18 +0200: > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Bert Huijben wrote: > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@apache.org] > >> Sent: woensdag 10 mei 2017 13:34 > >> To: Daniel Shahaf

Re: svn commit: r1794632 - /subversion/trunk/notes/sha1-advisory.txt

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Bert Huijben wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@apache.org] >> Sent: woensdag 10 mei 2017 13:34 >> To: Daniel Shahaf >> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org; comm...@subversion.apache.org

Re: beta@ feedback mailing list?

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Jacek Materna wrote: > Just observing from afar, in my opinion the root of what you are > trying to achieve here ties more to a lack of 'modern' collaboration. > If we want to engage the community/users more (expand the > IB/participation sphere

Re: stricter text conflicts in 1.10

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > I have seen several instances of proposals in our STATUS file where I > cannot merge without text conflicts because I am using a trunk client. > > I suppose most of us use 1.9.x clients to do such merges, because > otherwise

Re: wildcard authz docs question

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Doug Robinson wrote: > > Johan: > > Sorry for my sporadic replies... bin a bit hectic here. > > Reply buried deep below. > > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: >> >> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 12:49

Re: wildcard authz docs question

Brane: Right! And this is likely why the AuthZ implementation today for "/**" governs both the "file" and "directory" since it can't know. Given this, I'd like to keep the current behavior (that's in the branch for 1.8 and 1.9) as it "works". Thank you. Doug On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 5:22 AM,

Re: wildcard authz docs question

Johan: Sorry for my sporadic replies... bin a bit hectic here. Reply buried deep below. On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 12:49 AM, Doug Robinson > wrote: > > > > Johan: > > > > (sorry for the empty

Re: svn commit: r1794433 - /subversion/branches/1.9.x/STATUS

On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 09:36:18AM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 8:02 AM, James McCoy wrote: > > > Subversion is a library and we should be very careful about this. I > think > this code is by default left out on Windows, but there are tons

RE: svn commit: r1794632 - /subversion/trunk/notes/sha1-advisory.txt

> -Original Message- > From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@apache.org] > Sent: woensdag 10 mei 2017 13:34 > To: Daniel Shahaf > Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org; comm...@subversion.apache.org > Subject: Re: svn commit: r1794632 - /subversion/trunk/notes/sha1- >

Re: svn commit: r1794632 - /subversion/trunk/notes/sha1-advisory.txt

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:11:50AM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > Summary: > > > > > > Subversion repositories can be corrupted by committing two files > > which have different content, yet produce the same SHA1 checksum. > > I don't think we should call this "corruption": the

Re: svn commit: r1794632 - /subversion/trunk/notes/sha1-advisory.txt

[ Reviewing the whole file as of this revision. ] s...@apache.org wrote on Tue, May 09, 2017 at 19:07:09 -: > Author: stsp > Date: Tue May 9 19:07:09 2017 > New Revision: 1794632 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1794632=rev > Log: > * notes/sha1-advisory.txt: wording tweak > >

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 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 > wrote: > > >

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 wrote: > On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 10:46:39AM +0200, Jacek Materna wrote: > > Team, > > > > I wanted to start a discussion around the FAQ (and 1.10 rls. notes) as