Re: Requiring recent versions of APR etc. [was: Re: Subversion 1.0.0 released.]

> > If we could get an APR release in the meantime that would be helpful,
> > wouldn't it? ;)
>
> We should be conservative about requiring latest versions of external
> packages. (I assume you meant that we would then require this new
version.)
> Even though Subversion is closely tied to APR, people will want to install
> Subversion on systems that already have a previous version of APR
installed,
> and it may not be simple (and certainly not _as_ simple) for them to
> upgrade APR at the same time. The same goes for Neon, Python, etc.

Although this is true, those who already have working APR versions built
against working versions of BDB (ie. either 4.0 or 4.2) don't have to recompile
those versions. When compiling APR from source (against BDB 4.2), it would be
easier to require the latest release of APR which supports that.

What I mean to say is that we can *require* the APR 0.9.5-httpd-prerelase,
but advise the final 0.9.5 APR release when rebuilding. So it is all about the
words chosen to phrase this requirement - I guess.

> We have to draw the line somewhere - and a package version that is 6
> months to a year old is probably fine, but one that has only been released
in
> the last month or so probably has not yet been packaged and distributed in
a
> convenient form for all the operating system platforms that use it.

Which we would satisfy if we were to require the APR in httpd 2.0.48 and
advise the latest APR release if there were to be one in the comming week...

bye,

Erik.

-- 
GMX ProMail (250 MB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS, Virenschutz, 2,99 EUR/Monat...)
jetzt 3 Monate GRATIS + 3x DER SPIEGEL +++ http://www.gmx.net/derspiegel +++
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org