RE: 1.9.0-alpha2 up for testing/signing

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Reser [mailto:ben_at_reser.org]
> Sent: vrijdag 4 april 2014 18:45
> To: Ivan Zhakov
> Cc: Subversion Development
> Subject: Re: 1.9.0-alpha2 up for testing/signing
>
> On 4/4/14, 5:02 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> > And here is list of people voted for Unix release over the last year:
> > Branko
> > Philip
> > Stefan Fuhrmann
> > Julian
> > Stefan Sperling
> > C. Michael Pilato
> >
> > I had to vote for both Windows and Unix for 1.7.13 and 1.8.3, because
> > we cannot get Unix signatures within week for very critical security
> > release.
>
> That wasn't the point of me providing the list of people who had voted for
> Windows. My point was to show that out of the 5 people who have been
> voting
> for Windows releases, 2 voted, 1 couldn't vote due to not having a current
> setup (but raised no objections to the alpha), one hasn't said anything and
> you
> stayed silent about your objections until recently. That does not constitute a
> lack of interest in my opinion.
>
> However, to your point. The bar to getting someone to vote for Unix is much
> lower than for Windows. I voted for a Windows release back towards the
> end of
> 2012 because we couldn't find someone with a Windows setup. It took me
> the
> better part of a week to get a working setup. I still ended up with a setup
> that I couldn't use the next time. At least two of the people in the Unix list
> have worked on the Windows side in the past, but don't anymore. There's a
> reason for it.

And reasoning like this makes it even easier to ignore Windows...
I can setup a clean Windows machine to build Subversion in a few hours max using VS 2005 up to 2013; probably less than 20 minutes unless you customized a lot of things on the machine... You decided to write your own scrips, so I think you know who to complain to that your scripts broke...

Feel free to bring your VM to the Berlin Hackathon (or contact me) if you need a setup to build Subversion on Windows.

This reasoning is also what makes it hard for the TortoiseSVN developers to spend time on the Subversion side of things... They rather work around problems in TortoiseSVN than fixing things here, while we could really use their input... and in this case their testing effort.

The 1.9 code should make it *much easier* to test Subversion releases on Windows, because we can now link to binaries for all of our dependencies, and you can just put them in some directory with lib, bin and include subdirs. For 1.8 and earlier we expected source installs and nonstandard output directories in them all over the place. (One of the reasons TortoiseSVN ignores all our buildscripts and wrote their own)

I'm glad the Httpd and apr project finally moved away from only providing buildscripts for a 16 year old compiler chain. (Strange enough I read that some packagers are still getting this working for 1.9 even though we most likely broke some things for them... Probably by custom patches)

Introducing scons to the list of dependencies certainly doesn't help... You have to patch scons to support the recent compiler chains.

But I don't think this makes our users switch to a different platform... nor should they.

        Bert
Received on 2014-04-04 19:18:44 CEST