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

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

From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman_at_red-bean.com>
Date: 2005-10-14 20:54:26 CEST

On 10/14/05, John Peacock <jpeacock@rowman.com> wrote:
> 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.

Hm, maybe my understanding is off. I thought that while Joe Orton
sometimes breaks API/ABI compatibility moving from 0.X to 0.Y, he
never does so when going from 0.X.M to 0.X.N.

In other words, I think it's safe to leave the 3rd release component
as a variable, but be strict about the 2nd release component.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Oct 14 20:55:26 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.