Re: Upgrade to db 4.1

> In my experience, 4.0 and 4.1 are *equally* uncommon. I'd rather just
> keep things simple and require 4.1.

Conectiva, UnitedLinux, SuSE, and RedHat, have 4.0 in their
active/development distribution, while none have 4.1. That's not a
showstopper, but it's certainly an extra step towards subversion's
adoption. Also, in most cases, there are other software requiring 4.0
already, and probably not yet compatible with 4.1. Thus, to keep
supporting subversion (something we'll do anyway) they have to include
yet another parallel berkley db package. Not that bad, for sure, but
that remembers me about the issue we used to have with rpm, where we
always had a specific db version just to satisfy rpm's needs. In rpm's
case, it was so annoying that they ended up bundling bdb inside the rpm
tarball, and calling it rpmdb.

expecting-svndb-soon-ly y'rs

-- 
Gustavo Niemeyer
[ 2AAC 7928 0FBF 0299 5EB5  60E2 2253 B29A 6664 3A0C ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org