Re: 1.5.0-rc1 up for signing/testing

On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Peter Samuelson <peter_at_p12n.org> wrote:
>
> [Mark Phippard]
> > We talked about this last year and decided we were going to update to
> > the latest APR. I do not see any reason to change that decision.
>
> That is a fundamental policy change, then. In the past you have
> committed to binary compatibility for the Subversion library API until
> 2.0. Now you are breaking it, at least for those who use the deps
> tarball - which to me represents an official endorsement.

I am sorry but I think that is just a complete distortion. Is Debian
or Red Hat or Ubuntu or any distribution going to build Subversion
using our deps tarball? How is binary compatibility broken exactly?

If you are a user building Subversion yourself you have complete
control over the dependencies you use. BTW, you also probably could
care less about binary compatibility. Why should we include old
versions of things like APR and Neon when there are better versions
available that fix bugs? The vast majority of users could care less
about binary compat, and those that do are likely picking their own
dependencies and unaffected by this. Please try to use a little
perspective here.

-- 
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org