[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: 0.32, the "1.0" milestone, and the 1.0 release.

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2003-10-04 15:17:12 CEST

Barry Scott <barry@barrys-emacs.org> writes:

> I'm just checked to see what the state of Python API was in the issues.
> There is one issue 1451. Is it still you're intention to ship 1.0
> without a scripting API that works? In my world this is a gating
> factor for adoption of subversion. I'm not trying to change your
> mind on release criteria, I just want to know when this will be
> important enough to make work. Then I can plan what I do accordingly.
> I'll keep working with Russell to get svn.client working to help
> get this usable. But I fear that at some point we will run out of
> knowledge of how subversion and its bindings are supposed to work and
> will need help from a core developer.

While I think the scripting language is important, I disagree on your
assertion that it needs to be perfected for 1.0. In my mind,
Subversion 1.0 is about providing the tools and backing libraries to
give folks a real excuse to leave their crummy old CVS behind and
never look back. We will do this.

I *would*, however, like to see our bindings shaped up -- with
dedicated maintainers for each supported language -- by Subversion
1.1. And that means (IMO) a few things:

   - consolidation of effort: SWIG is a great tool that can go the
     distance if we can take the time to tune the interface files. It
     bothers me that I can't talk about "the Java bindings" without
     having to state which one I'm talking about.

   - consolidation of design: while SWIG can do the gruntwork of
     wrapping C APIs, there is a level of language-friendly work that
     needs to be designed on top of the SWIG output. Ideally, these
     efforts would also be coordinated across the languages, with
     specific design goals that are shared by them all.

The best binding set I've ever seen is that for the wxWindows library.
The documentation for all the bindings languages is so similar that
it's all in one doc-set, with little footnotes for language-specific
exceptions where they happen. And it's all SWIG + an extra layer,
unless I'm mistaken. *That's* what I want to see for Subversion.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 4 15:18:30 2003

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.