[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: John Peacock <jpeacock_at_rowman.com>
Date: 2005-10-14 21:00:56 CEST

Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> 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.

I didn't mean a deliberate change but an accidental one. If we don't
collectively test the subsequent releases of Neon, we are relying on Mr.
Orton to not accidentally break Subversion. I don't have enough of a
history with Neon's relative stability to make that call.

I'm just saying that the principle of explicitly permitting /known/ good
versions is always going to be better (even if only slightly) than
establishing minimums.


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
Received on Fri Oct 14 21:01:21 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.