[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: [Conclusion] Subversion 1.3 distribution tar slimmer?

From: Justin Erenkrantz <justin_at_erenkrantz.com>
Date: 2005-09-01 18:40:44 CEST

--On September 1, 2005 6:44:25 AM -0500 Ben Collins-Sussman
<sussman@collab.net> wrote:

> On Sep 1, 2005, at 5:12 AM, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
>
>> +1: kfogel, sussman, brane, dionisos (ie me)
>>
>> maxb was in favor, but proposed phasing out.
>>
>> other votes: (none)
>>
>> So, I think it has been decided we won't be distributing neon and apr
>> in-tree anymore.
>>
>
> Well, we didn't exactly call for a formal vote or anything. :-) And
> jerenkrantz was not happy with the idea, nor were a few users who spoke
> up... (a couple mailed me privately).

Yah, last time I checked, I had a vote. ;-)

> The vocal minority, in this case, seems to be a group of people who are not
> packagers, but for some reason (either because they use an obscure OS, or
> choose to ignore existing binary packages) build every release from

I don't think either of these reasons are fair summations of the concerns that
have been raised. A few more legitimate scenarios are:

- 'bootstrapping' the system on which binary packages aren't available
  (IMHO, our binary packages for Solaris and Mac OS X aren't useful.)

- Users don't have the ability to install binary packages
  (Think a standard IT shop that doesn't give root to coders)

- Extending #2, a buggy version is already installed
  (Think RHEL, Debian, etc. which don't go on the bleeding edge.
   They might also ship with buggy APRs and Neon, etc, etc.)

So, we shouldn't be so quick to write off folks who need the dependencies
bundled with Subversion. There are lots of legitimate scenarios where
up-to-date binary packages (including the proper dependencies) aren't
available or can't be installed.

> tarball. I still don't understand why this change would be more than a
> one-time inconvenience for such people. The first time they build from
> tarball, they need to fetch dependencies. Everytime thereafter, the
> dependencies are already installed.

FWIW, that's not how it works in my setup. I separate self-compiled software
based on versions - i.e. Subversion 1.2.3 lands in pkg/subversion-1.2.3. This
allows me to install multiple versions of software are the same time (which is
excellent for testing). Therefore, the dependencies aren't installed in a
directory where I can reuse them.

As I mentioned before, once I get subversion bootstrapped, then I place things
in *-trunk and reuse them. But, that's only because I choose to live on the
bleeding edge of things - I don't do this for anything I don't work on though.

Again, the compromise I support is having a version of the source tarballs
that includes all of the dependencies. -- justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 1 18:41:31 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.