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

Re: Releasing 1.6

From: Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 17:27:11 +0200

On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 10:03:13AM -0500, kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com wrote:
> Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote on 08/08/2008 09:46:49 AM:
> > On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 08:56:07AM -0500, kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com
> > > The Collabnet beta binaries were nice, but they were in fact just
> > > early releases, not containing features that potentially won't
> > > be merged into a future release. (I have no reason to believe
> > > they wouldn't be merged eventually though...)
> >
> > There seems to be a big misunderstanding here:
> > AFAIK, CollabNet is _not_ planning to add features which are not
> > in trunk already. No one has ever said that this was intended.
> No one ever said it wasn't either...

I just did :)

But jokes aside, you're totally right about asking this question.

Some of us had the chance to read the start of the discussion on the
svn-full-committers mailing list, which is of course an unfair
advantage, because many details were provided there before
the thread was moved to dev@ in mid-air.
It may have been better for this thread to have started out
on dev@ in the first place, but that was not my decision.

Also, I have written and reviewed parts of the features under
consideration, so I understand most of the changes they want to
backport in rather elaborate detail.

> > The changes under discussion are related to client-side authentication
> > features, and do not require WC format changes.
> >
> > Some new client-side public API has been added. But as usual,
> > the APIs are backward-compatible, so if a client compiled against
> > stock 1.5 libraries does not run with the modified ones, there's
> > a bug.
> >
> > The most user-visible change is that the client configuration files
> > understand some new options. Old clients will just ignore these
> > options. Subversion 1.6 will be able to use them.
> Do these changes require a minor version number bump, or can
> this just be something like 1.5.2 (beta), just like the
> original 1.5.0 (beta) versions released by collabnet?

The 1.5.0 (beta) versions were probably made when 1.4 was still
the latest release.

Quoting http://subversion.tigris.org/hacking.html#release-numbering

  Upgrading to a new minor release in the same major line may cause
  new APIs to appear, but not remove any APIs. Any code written to
  the old minor number will work with any later minor number in that
  line. However, downgrading afterwards may not work, if new code has
  been written that takes advantage of the new APIs.

As I said, some new client-side public API has been added.
If clients take advantage of it, they break when the API is
removed again (i.e. when the library is downgraded).

So the features under consideration can only enter an offical
release with some number 1.x, where x > 5, because 1.5 has
already been released.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-08-08 17:27:35 CEST

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.