Re: Why svn 2.0 may come sooner than we expected

Ben Reser wrote:

>Greg and I had a long discussion about this on IRC yesterday (or maybe
>it was the day before that). I disagree with his argument that we have
>to go to 2.0 just because of this.
>
>
[etc]

It's a thorny issue, but I agree with Ben here. httpd-2.0.x/apr-0.9.x
will be around for quite a while, living in parallel with
httpd-2.2.x/apr-1.x. We can probably remain source compatible with both.
The same version of SVN *might* support DAV autoversioning better if
it's compiled against httpd-2.2.x, but as Ben points out, our "feature"
set already depends on which BDB we're linking with, and this would be
the same. The svnserve protocol, as a counterexample, doesn't care a bit
about the size of apr_off_t.

I'd be very sad if we pushed for a 2.0 release _without_ improving the
FS schema and (yeaargh!) the WC design.

-- Brane

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jul 2 02:04:43 2004