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

Re: Merging r9212 and r9231

From: Jostein Chr. Andersen <jostein_at_josander.net>
Date: 2004-04-17 11:14:59 CEST

On Saturday 17 April 2004 00.17, Ben Reser wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 11:12:38AM -0700, Ben Reser wrote:
> > This is a Windows specific build system change. That apparently is only
> > useful for VC7. So far only josander has voted for it. I'm not sure
> > how many other committers have VC7 or feel comfortable reviewing this
> > change. Any objections to merging this with just josander's vote?
> No response. Punted until 1.0.3.

Well, it was no "objections merging this with just josander's vote" so
you could merge it with your own +0 :-)

You can say +0 and say that you like the consept. Then it can be merged.
Here is why you like the consept:

If Sussman or Sander makes the binaries (using VC7 and without debug
symbol files as in 1.0.1), then the installer in wc_1.0.x-branch is
useless without merging (as it was last time).
This is not all, VC6 and VC7 ships with diffrent runtime files and the
installer have to deal with this too. So, please, merge it, the current
code in wc_1.0.x-branch is for VC6 only!

In order to deliver a Windows Setup for 1.0.1, I had to ignore the
wc_1.0.x-branch (the Windows Installer part of it), making it pretty
meaningless to use energy on wc_1.0.x-branch at all.


http://www.josander.net/kontakt/ ||
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Apr 17 11:26:45 2004

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.