Greg Stein wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 11:05:53AM -0500, Karl Fogel wrote:
> > Tim Moloney <moloney@mrsl.com> writes:
> > > Now that Apache 2.0 is released, will Subversion stabilize the
> > > versions of the software that it depends on? Or will it continue
> > > to require the latest versions of httpd, apr, neon, etc.?
> >...
> > At the moment, of course, this is the case because there isn't much in
> > the development tree that's not also in the release. I don't know if
> > that will continue to be true in the future; probably Greg Stein would
> > best be able to guess about this. Greg?
>
> Actually, we *do* require something past Apache 2.0.35. There was a change
> to mod_dav that inserted another member into the dav_provider structure. We
> were totally compatible with that change (the compiler would automatically
> insert a NULL), but Sander went and explicitly added the NULL :-)
>
> [ which means, that we now *require* post-2.0.35 ]
>
> I expect there will be other, similar changes in the mod_dav interface to
> its provider which will cause us to require a newer version of Apache.
> Hopefully, it will be stable, but I'm not going to make guarantees.
>
> It is also quite reasonable to expect that we're going to want to require a
> later version of Apache to pick up some bug fixes.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
Also, when you run a Subversion server using SSL with Apache 2.0.35 and
browse the svn repository with Netscape, you'll have runaway httpd processes.
Apache HEAD fixes this issue. Actually, this isn't a svn issue, just an
Apache issue, but it arose for me out of using svn.
Best,
Blair
--
Blair Zajac <blair@orcaware.com>
Web and OS performance plots - http://www.orcaware.com/orca/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Apr 15 20:31:02 2002