Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Allow any Neon version from specified branches

[Greg Stein]
> [please review the PATCH mail submission guidelines in hacking.html;
> it was very difficult to review your patch as emailed]

Shrug - it came through my MUA inline.

> In the past, we have had issues with Neon (with all dependent
> libraries, actually). I prefer that we only allow known-good
> libraries, rather than open it to "anything on this branch".

We don't do that for other software we use, such as Berkeley DB. And I
don't think we should. All software has bugs, and I don't think it's
our responsibility to detect buggy versions of unrelated software.

I guess the reason we do it for neon is a historical tendency to find
serious bugs and incompatibilities between neon and libsvn_ra_dav. But
neon has matured a great deal in the past 5+ years. The reason to
whitelist neon versions but not, say, libxml versions is, in my view,
obsolete.

That said, Arfrever, I don't agree with adding 0.29 to the list of
supported major versions. If it has been tested, I would add it in a
separate commit. 0.29.0-dev is not the same thing, IMO.

-- 
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/