mark benedetto king <mbk@lowlatency.com> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 09:26:57AM -0500, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> > > By the way, Ben pointed out something that I probably should have
> > > mentioned in my original review of your changes: are you trying
> > > to make Subversion compatible with *both* Neon 0.23.x and 0.24?
> > > If so, there's no need -- just go the simple route and make
> > > Subversion require Neon 0.24 or higher. This is a compilation
> > > dependency, not a client/server compatibility issue, so we don't
> > > have to maintain backwards compatibility with old Neons.
> >
>
> I recall us supporting multiple BDBs for quite some time to encourage
> testing of the new version without forcing everyone to upgrade. Also,
> this is a significantly larger change than the BDB one.
But in the case of neon's SSL api, there's no way to keep it backward
compatible. At least, I doubt it's worth the effort. I told David
Waite to just gut his cert providers and "do them right" with the new
API. So that means a flat-out compile-time dependency on neon 0.24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Aug 11 19:44:18 2003