Re: [PATCH] Reworking INSTALL

Garrett, thanks for catching that problem. I originally documented Neon as
optional, but then I ran across this in the original INSTALL file:

       If you don't see ra_local, it probably means that Berkeley DB
       wasn't found when compiling your client binary. If you don't
       see ra_dav, then something is very wrong; most likely your
       dynamic loader/linker can't find libsvn_ra_dav.so (see section
       I.B above.)

Since Neon is required for the client to support ra_dav, I ass-u-me'd that
this meant that Neon was now required without actually checking it. So
should this passage be altered to reflect the fact that "very wrong" may
only mean that Neon is not included? Or am I unique in finding it misleading?

Greg, I agree absolutely that the USING stuff more properly belongs in
README. The only reason I didn't put it there to begin with was because of
the directory descriptions that were already in there. You are bang on that
these are more properly kept in HACKING.

Thanks to everyone for their feedback, and keep it coming if you have any
other suggestions. I'll try to have another patch ready tonight.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:37:01 2006