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

Re: Setting a date for 1.3 RC tarball.

From: <kfogel_at_collab.net>
Date: 2005-10-10 22:19:54 CEST

David James <james82@gmail.com> writes:
> We need to fix the crashes on Windows before the Python bindings will
> be ready for a release candidate. Do you think the release could wait
> a week?

A week? I think we shouldn't need that long.

> > - Is the Python bindings Trac test crash on Windows, solved? I
> > think not; at least, the last message in the thread is
> > http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2005-09/1047.shtml, and it's a
> > disgruntled statement from Brane: "Ah. Well. Yes, the trac tests
> > crash again.. :("
> No, this isn't solved. To fix the crash issues in the Windows
> bindings, we need to compile Subversion on Windows with debug symbols,
> and use a debugger to find out where the bindings are crashing during
> the test suite. C. Mike, would you be able to take a look at this?

Or if not CMike, is there someone else with a Windows box and a little
bindings experience around?

(I've pinged CMike privately in case he didn't see this thread, though.)

> > - We haven't upgraded server-side Python scripts to use the new
> > automatic memory management API. On the one hand, this doesn't
> > need to block 1.3 -- it's a nice-to-have, not a must-have. On the
> > other hand, David James *already* wrote the patch to do it:
> >
> > http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2005-09/0821.shtml
> >
> > I think we should apply it to trunk, and port the change to 1.3.x,
> > if for no other reason than that this is exactly what release
> > candidates are for. It's the best way to get the new bindings the
> > testing they need. Thoughts?
> I'd like to commit the patch, but I don't know enough about the
> affected scripts to test them properly. Anyone able to help?

I'd say let's not block 1.3 with this one, then. The main script to
worry about is probably mailer.py, which isn't too hard to test (well,
individually, none of them are hard to test, but in aggregate it's a
bunch of drudge work). We should probably merge the patch to trunk.
Getting code into the bleeding edge is a good way to get it tested by
random people (I can do one or two, but couldn't promise to test all
of them).

An open question: can we release the upgraded versions in 1.3.1 or
later? Or should it wait until 1.4. I guess 1.4, much as I hate to
say it.


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
Received on Mon Oct 10 23:31:34 2005

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.