On 7/4/06, Max Bowsher <maxb1@ukf.net> wrote:
> Malcolm Rowe wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 03:59:22PM +0200, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> >> On 7/4/06, Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-svn-dev@farside.org.uk> wrote:
> >>> So, Subversion 1.4.0-rc1 was built with APR 0.9.7. Given the bugs fixed
> >>> in APR since 0.9.7, should we consider building the next -rc with a
> >>> newer version (0.9.12?)
> >> Given that APR should be backward compatible, why not always ship with
> >> the newest?
> >>
> >
> > Good question. We recommend 0.9.7 in INSTALL, but I suspect that's
> > just because we test and ship with 0.9.7, rather than because of any
> > particular reason that 0.9.7 is superior to 0.9.8+.
>
> 0.9.7 is in INSTALL simply because it was the best available at the time
> INSTALL was last updated, I think.
>
> We should be track the latest official release of 0.9.x.
+1, unless there is a good reason not to do so we should be using the
newest version of all the dependencies we ship.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jul 5 16:25:45 2006