Re: More on possible problem with Neon 0.25.0 [was Re: 1.3.0 RC1 ready to be rolled]

Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> Which, for a long time, I've always thought was a horrible thing to
> do. +1 on fixing that.

Patches welcome? ;-)

Seriously, there is a necessary tension between:

a) being flexible with versions of packages you depend on;
b) being trusting that the packages you depend on won't break your code
when they make a new release.

If I'm not way off base, libsvn_ra_dav is _highly_ dependent on the
operation of the Neon library, just as the whole project is with APR.
Having specific, tested versions is the more conservative policy and
probably is a wise one as well. Users have a way to ignore the
limitations if they so choose.

That said, I'm +0 on changing the regex to something more relaxed.

John

-- 
John Peacock
Director of Information Research and Technology
Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
4501 Forbes Boulevard
Suite H
Lanham, MD  20706
301-459-3366 x.5010
fax 301-429-5748
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org