<rbb@rkbloom.net> writes:
> On 3 Jan 2003, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
>
> > Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@collab.net> writes:
> >
> > > Oh well, my hope is that you would have put this change in svn once
> > > httpd/apr 2.0.44 was released, but who knows when that will happen.
> > > It would be nice to say that svn .17 builds against 2.0.44. I guess
> > > we'll see if we can make that happen again when we release .17.
> >
> > Actually, if we're ever going to fix bug 773, this means changing
> > mod_dav itself within httpd 2.1. So I suspect that svn releases are
> > now going to QA'd against the latest httpd-2.1 tarballs. :-)
>
> Are you serious? The 2.0 to 2.1 bump was completely arbitrary for httpd.
> If you seriously need to move to 2.1 in order to solve a bug, then the
> release model for httpd is horribly broken.
If I submit a patch to mod_dav which *changes* the mod_dav API, do you
really think that will be accepted into the httpd 2.0 branch? I've
been assuming not. So Subversion will need to follow 2.1 for a while,
I suspect.
Am I wrong about this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jan 3 16:56:34 2003