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

RE: svn commit: r1138040 - in /subversion/trunk: build/ac-macros/apache.m4 configure.ac

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:44:10 +0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 21 juni 2011 20:31
> To: Philip Martin
> Cc: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1138040 - in /subversion/trunk: build/ac-
> macros/apache.m4 configure.ac
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 14:15, Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com>
> wrote:
> > Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> writes:

> > It will take a concious decision by the user to use
> >  --with-apr-util=/path/to/apr-2-config
> > as configure will not pick up apr-2 automatically unless apr-2-config
> > masquerades as apu-config (it doesn't in a standard apr-2 install).
> >
> > We could make it --with-apr2 to make it more obvious.
> I'm thinking of the case where a distro packager uses those
> configuration settings. Then a downstream sysadmin thinks, "they
> guarantee this is safe" and upgrades to the latest svn release. BOOM.
> Yes, we can blame the distro packager for screwing around with our
> compatibility rules, but I'd rather not give them the choice.
> Would you be okay with a --with-apr2 setting that is labeled
> "experimental" and issues a warning? ("use of this option is
> incompatible with regular Subversion releases") (or maybe the
> --with-apr2-experimental or somesuch?)

How did we handle the transition from apr 0.9 to 1.X?

This was about the same situation, except that apr 2.0 is still completely
experimental now.
(But that might change before Subversion 1.8)

Received on 2011-06-21 20:44:40 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.