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

RE: svn commit: r35439 - in trunk/subversion/bindings/swig: . python/libsvn_swig_py ruby/libsvn_swig_ruby

From: Bert Huijben <rhuijben_at_sharpsvn.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 11:59:46 +0100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 10:06 AM
> To: Bert Huijben
> Cc: gstein_at_tigris.org; dev_at_subversion.tigris.org
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r35439 - in trunk/subversion/bindings/swig: .
> python/libsvn_swig_py ruby/libsvn_swig_ruby
>
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 00:17, Bert Huijben <bert_at_vmoo.com> wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Hyrum K. Wright [mailto:hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org]
> >> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 10:26 PM
> >> To: svn_at_subversion.tigris.org
> >> Subject: svn commit: r35439 - in trunk/subversion/bindings/swig: .
> >> python/libsvn_swig_py ruby/libsvn_swig_ruby
> >>
> >> Author: hwright
> >> Date: Fri Jan 23 13:26:16 2009
> >> New Revision: 35439
> >>
> >> Log:
> >> Fix the swig bindings after r35424.
> >>
> >> * subversion/bindings/swig/core.i,
> >> subversion/bindings/swig/svn_wc.i,
> >> subversion/bindings/swig/svn_delta.i,
> >> subversion/bindings/swig/svn_fs.i:
> >> Include apr_md5.h in place of svn_md5.h.
> >
> > If this breaks our build, it probably breaks third party tools too?
> >
> > I like the idea of the public header cleanup, but I'm not sure if we
> can do
> > this without breaking third party code.
> >
> >
> > While it is not part of the ABI, the header files are certainly part
> of our
> > public API.
>
> I thought about that, and am somewhat torn. You're right in that a
> source change is now needed ("add another #include"). But I'm also
> thinking, "well... you used something from a header, and didn't
> include it. fix the bug in your code."
>
> All of our APIs and ABIs are the same. All that is changed is our
> delivery of them to developers.

        Yes,

It is not that my users would notice anything, because I only deliver .Net
assemblies and normal binaries to others...

I'm just afraid this slows down integration of the initial Subversion 1.6
release on the common Linux/*BSD distributions, as third party packages
would need upgrading (to fix compilation issues upstream) or local patches
to be compiled against 1.6.

I have no idea how many packages in the common distribution compile against
subversion...

        Bert

------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1049420
Received on 2009-01-25 12:00:14 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.