On 10 November 2014 10:59, Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> On 10.11.2014 11:22, Stuart Rossiter wrote:
> > Personally I'd prefer if people used the JavaHL APIs from the
> > org.apache
> > namespace. They're far better maintained.
> > So is that a "won't fix since package is deprecated"? Do you want me
> > to raise a bug report in any case for tracking purposes (or in case
> > you might flag it as a very low priority fix)?
> I think this is the second time I saw a complaint about a bug in the
> org.tigris JavaHL API in 1.7+ ... so I guess the priority was just
> raised from "no priority" to "low priority". :)
> I'll see if I can fix it, but don't expect fixes anytime soon, and
> especially don't expect another 1.7 release with any such fixes
> backported. It might happen, but I make no promises.
OK great; I appreciate that it's low priority. Do you want me to raise a
bug for you?
> -- Brane
> P.S.: BTW, I saw your note about "of course should be using SVNKit" over
> on StackOverflow. Apparently, SVNKit is not very actively maintained; it
> doesn't even implement all 1.8 features yet (and even basic working copy
> compatibility with that version took 6+ months to arrive), and AFAIK
> there aren't likely to be any 1.9-related updates. And it's much slower
> than JavaHL.
As I said privately, I was actually just trying to preempt "why don't you
use SVNKit?" answers by saying that I knew this would avoid the need for
the native library and JAR 'pairing', but I was going the native route for
licensing reasons. I appreciate that there are other pros to using native
JavaHL (as you outline); I've edited the StackOverflow question to make
this clear (and credited your WANDisco suggestion in a comment on the
accepted answer which suggested the same). Thanks again.
Research Fellow: EPSRC Care Life Cycle Project
Received on 2014-11-10 17:01:01 CET