Daniel Rall <dlr@finemaltcoding.com> wrote on 10/26/2005 01:52:28 PM:
> On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Mark Phippard wrote:
>
> > Marc Sherman <msherman@projectile.ca> wrote on 10/24/2005 03:51:01 PM:
> ...
> > > One more thing: Since recent versions of Subclipse have been tied to
> > > specific versions of Subversion, I'd like to suggest that you
consider
> > > changing your version numbering to be based on the subversion
version
> > > you're linked against. It would make the relationship between
versions
> > > clearer.
> >
> > The problem is how do we do this without passing ourselves off as a
"1.3"
> > version?
>
> Indeed. The best we can do is clearly document what versions of
Subversion
> have been tested against, and have the software refuse to start against
> versions of Subversion known _not_ to work.
We can't really refuse to start because we have JavaSVN which will always
work in some manner.
What I did in the most recent release is I added some intelligence to the
loading of the JavaHL adapter to make sure I have a library with the valid
version. Ideally, JavaHL would have a method added to return its version.
Anyway, if I load a pre JavaHL 1.2 library then the JavaHL adapter is not
available which causes Subclipse to switch to JavaSVN.
I intend to do the same thing with 1.3. I will probably call the new
method to get the Admin directory and if it tosses an exception not allow
the adapter to be available.
Mark
_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. and SoftLanding Europe Plc by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Received on Thu Oct 27 04:03:47 2005