2008-09-22 05:33:18 Peter Samuelson napisał(a):
> [Greg Stein]
> > In the past, we have had issues with Neon (with all dependent
> > libraries, actually). I prefer that we only allow known-good
> > libraries, rather than open it to "anything on this branch".
> We don't do that for other software we use, such as Berkeley DB. And I
> don't think we should. All software has bugs, and I don't think it's
> our responsibility to detect buggy versions of unrelated software.
> I guess the reason we do it for neon is a historical tendency to find
> serious bugs and incompatibilities between neon and libsvn_ra_dav. But
> neon has matured a great deal in the past 5+ years. The reason to
> whitelist neon versions but not, say, libxml versions is, in my view,
> That said, Arfrever, I don't agree with adding 0.29 to the list of
> supported major versions. If it has been tested, I would add it in a
> separate commit. 0.29.0-dev is not the same thing, IMO.
What do you think about NEON_ALLOWED_LIST="0\.25 0\.26 0\.27\.2 0\.28 0\.29\.0-dev" ?
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
Received on 2008-09-22 23:03:33 CEST