[Peter Samuelson]
> Would you consider accepting a patch to make SONAME handling explicit
> in the Makefile, and also make it sensitive to apr version? Would
> you consider this for 1.3.1 or 1.3.2?
Ping. I think maxb and ghudson agree with me, jerenkrantz and joe
disagree. Are there further questions I can answer, anything else I
can do so that you can make a decision on this?
It has been noted that this is somewhat time-sensitive - apache 2.2 is
on the rise, and every user and vendor who upgrades to it and
recompiles subversion will need to decide how to handle the ABI change.
In my opinion, the only sane options for Subversion are to make this
change (or an equivalent solution) as soon as possible (by 1.3.2?), or
refuse to support Apache 2.2 until Subversion 2.0.
* http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2006-03/0522.shtml
My patch. It illustrates two approaches to detect the ABI - please
pick one. (:
* http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2006-03/0503.shtml
I attempt to explain the need for this. Justin, did you have any
further questions?
* http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2006-03/0583.shtml
Joe Orton agrees that delaying this decision hurts users. He _seems_
to be suggesting that apache 2.2 not be supported at all until
Subversion 2.0, but I hate to put words in someone's mouth - Joe, can
you clarify what position you think Subversion should take on this?
If other developers could read the above messages and weigh in, that
would be great. I'm happy to answer any further questions.
Peter
Received on Fri Mar 31 09:49:09 2006