On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 01:46:45AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Depending upon how frequently we go through the 1.0->1.1->1.2 cycle, how
> about for the perl (or any other 'unstable' binding) saying that it'll be
> compatible for that minor series alone? The python bindings, on the other
> hand, would be expected to work in any 1.x series (like the C bindings).
>
> Perhaps that's a compromise that could work? So, you'd only be stuck with
> the bindings until we hit 1.2 (assuming odd/even dev cycles which isn't
> even agreed to yet).
Well honestly as someone who's trying to write an app with these
Bindings I can say they just aren't usable (client side at least, clkao
is using the lower level stuff to write svk which is better off than the
client side stuff, in fact it was the first thing I got to work when I
started looking at this). If we don't merge any of these changes that
I'm doing into 1.0 then nobody in their right mind is going to try and
use them for Client scripting. In which case the compatability
guarantee just isn't going to buy them much.
If we do put some of the changes in that I'm making now I could
certainly live with a minor to minor version compatability. Though I
would expect that we'll get to a point where we can be comfortable
making the same gurantee on compatability as you feel for python.
--
Ben Reser <ben@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Dec 19 11:12:24 2003