Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 8 Nov 2005 19:20:16 +0300
From:      Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Edwin Mons <e@ik.nu>
Cc:        ports@FreeBSD.org, lev@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: port devel/subversion
Message-ID:  <863261238.20051108192016@serebryakov.spb.ru>
In-Reply-To: <4370CEC0.6080000@ik.nu>
References:  <4370CEC0.6080000@ik.nu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello Edwin,

Tuesday, November 8, 2005, 7:13:52 PM, you wrote:

EM> Why did you update subversion to a pre-release (that is: unstable) 
EM> version of 1.3.0, while 1.2.3 is the current recommended version by the 
EM> subversion team?  People (like me) are counting on a stable subversion 
EM> client/server in the ports tree...  Perhaps the 1.3.0rc? can move to a 
EM> seperate port, for instance devel/subversion-devel...  I'd really like 
EM> to see a stable, released version in the main port...
 Because:
 (a) This RC is fixed many bugs, which was reported to me as port's maintainer. Backport patches when release will be in month or less is not what I want to do.
 (b) Some gcc maintainers need this version, because gcc project uses subversion now and REQUIRES 1.3.0-rc1 or later.
 (c) We need to test this version on FreeBSD BEFORE release, because sibversion's developers never does tests on FreeBSD themselfs.
  
 And, last, but not least:

 (d) You is not enforced to update. 1.2.3_3 is Ok for you? Don't updgrade port -- it is simple!

 And about `subversion-devel': 95% of time there is not any alpha, beata or rc versions of subversion project. RC presents for less than a month and even nto for every release, so 95% of time `devel' port will be equal to `simple' one.

-- 
Best regards,
 Lev                            mailto:lev@FreeBSD.org




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?863261238.20051108192016>