Re: [Conclusion] Subversion 1.3 distribution tar slimmer?

On Sep 1, 2005, at 5:12 AM, Erik Huelsmann wrote:

> +1: kfogel, sussman, brane, dionisos (ie me)
>
> maxb was in favor, but proposed phasing out.
>
> other votes: (none)
>
> So, I think it has been decided we won't be distributing neon and apr
> in-tree anymore.
>

Well, we didn't exactly call for a formal vote or anything. :-) And
jerenkrantz was not happy with the idea, nor were a few users who
spoke up... (a couple mailed me privately).

The vocal minority, in this case, seems to be a group of people who
are not packagers, but for some reason (either because they use an
obscure OS, or choose to ignore existing binary packages) build every
release from tarball. I still don't understand why this change would
be more than a one-time inconvenience for such people. The first
time they build from tarball, they need to fetch dependencies.
Everytime thereafter, the dependencies are already installed.

In any case, ./configure has *always* told users exactly how to fetch
apr, apr-util, and neon when such things aren't found. So we don't
need to change our build system. I agree with Eric... we should try
this for svn-1.3-rc1 and see what happens.

-- 
www.collab.net  <>  CollabNet  |  Distributed Development On Demand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org