"Daniel L. Rall" <dlr@finemaltcoding.com> wrote on 10/19/2006 05:44:39 PM:
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Mark Phippard wrote:
> ...
> > We have been in the process of moving the Subclipse project to
Eclipse.org
> > and making it an official Eclipse project. As part of this process we
> > have had to undergo a legal review of all of our code by the Eclipse
> > Foundation lawyers. Since we rely on JavaHL, this also means
Subversion
> > code has to be reviewed by the lawyers. We were told upfront there is
no
> > chance they will accept Neon because it is LGPL. I told them about
Serf,
> > which would be OK. For me, this means I'd just have to make my own
Win32
> > binary builds using Serf since that is not how the "official builds"
are
> > currently made.
> ...
>
> Hmmm. Mark, what sort of timeframe does a Neon-replacement need to be
> available in? If it needs to happen before Subversion 1.5.0 is
> released, you may want to propose some of Justin's fixes for backport
> to the Subversion 1.4.x line.
It probably isn't urgent. I will only be providing Win32 binaries so if I
have to do something custom I will. What I expected to do was just defer
making the binaries available and come up with a way to get them via the
Subclipse site or something so that we bypass Eclipse for now. There have
been a lot of changes made in trunk for 1.5 that we want anyway. So I
might try to make 1.5 a requirement for the version we make available from
Eclipse. The really biggie for us are the copy/move improvements, but
there are several others too.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Oct 20 00:54:29 2006