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

Re: Spinning off the bindings

From: Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 19:17:34 -0500

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
<hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> This issue has come up a few times on IRC, but I don't know if we've ever
> discussed it here, so I'm opening this can of worms now: Should the bindings be
> spun off into their own project(s)?

I completely understand the sentiment, but I think it is too late to
do this (in SVN's history not specifically this release) and could
interject a lot of uncertainty into the future of the bindings.

We'd basically be asking each of the bindings to come up with their
own build systems that had to deal with all the different ways
Subversion can be built or packaged. There'd be a lot of uncertainty
about whether packagers would include these bindings. As an example,
Linux distros have only recently started to really support JavaHL as a
package. It used to be really hard to get. I have great fear that if
it is spun off it will just get dropped or it will be impossible for
something like Subclipse to predict what version will be available or
what version of SVN it supports.

There is a lot of stuff out there that is built up around these
various bindings and this sort of change could wind up creating chaos.
 Also, as you touched on, while the bindings can be a PITA it is also
hard to know how many release problems they have prevented by the
things they uncovered. Things are a little better now because of the
buildbot you added. Perhaps this can ultimately help this get better
by spotting failures sooner.

Mark Phippard
Received on 2009-02-04 01:17:56 CET

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.