Re: Update dependencies tarball for 1.5 release
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Mark Phippard wrote:
> Should we change this for the 1.5 release? I believe the binary
> dependency issue has been raised in the past for a reason to not do
> this, but wouldn't the people most likely be to affected by this
> problem be using an APR from their distro?
> The next one is Neon. One of the 1.5 milestone issues is 2807: win32
> client segfault with SSPI / Kerberos over HTTPS.
> Based on the issue, it sounds like we just need to be using 0.26.4+ of
> Neon to resolve this problem. Should we update our version of Neon in
> the dependencies to this version?
> It seems like we have a lot more to gain than lose by updating our
> default dependencies.
+1 on updating the dependencies.
Received on Mon Sep 10 21:40:49 2007
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev