svnserve DoS attack (1.7.8)

2013-05-15 Thread Boris Lytochkin
Hi. It is possible to force svnserve daemon to exit using trivial (and valid) TCP session: 14:04:18.277961 IP6 fdef::1.34130 fd87:e01f:53ee:1203:6672:6565:57fa:eb29.3690: Flags [S], seq 3296066821, win 17880, options [mss 1220,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 0 14:04:18.278001 IP6

Re: Subversion Doesn't Have Branches aka Crossing the Streams aka Branches as First Class Objects?

2013-05-15 Thread Nico Kadel-Garcia
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Zé jose.pas...@gmx.com wrote: No one is dismissing anyone's work. Quite the contrary. I don't know I'm afriad you did, with the insistence that branching *in the form you expect* is a given in all SCM's, and that Subversion is therefore clearly missing a very

Re: Subversion Doesn't Have Branches aka Crossing the Streams aka Branches as First Class Objects?

2013-05-15 Thread Les Mikesell
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Zé jose.pas...@gmx.com wrote: What has been said regarding subversions lack of support for branching was, I think, quite clear. Well, no. The only thing you've made clear is that you don't like it or you don't understand how it is supposed to be used. You

Re: Subversion Doesn't Have Branches aka Crossing the Streams aka Branches as First Class Objects?

2013-05-15 Thread Les Mikesell
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Reedick andrew.reed...@cbeyond.net wrote: Isolating change is a fundamental tenet behind branching. The fact that an outside change can affect a branch (and a tagged baseline) is wrong by definition. OK, but that means you need to anchor the

RE: Subversion Doesn't Have Branches aka Crossing the Streams aka Branches as First Class Objects?

2013-05-15 Thread Andreas Krey
On Wed, 15 May 2013 13:06:52 +, Andrew Reedick wrote: ... In the Future(tm), Subversion, IMHO, will need to treat branches (and tags) as first class objects because branches and tags are core concepts of modern version control systems. So what? SVN decided to map them into the directory