RE: Rolling back to 1.6.x Subversion

[Jeremy Bopp <jeremy at bopp dot net>]

Jim Garrison <jim.garrison@troux.com> wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> On Behalf Of Jeremy Bopp
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 9:18 AM
>> Subject: Re: Rolling back to 1.6.x Subversion
>> 
>> That whole process is going to be unsupported here though, so is
>there
>> some reason you must remain on such an old release of subversion?
>
>Um... 1.7 just came out in the last few months, 1.6.17 isn't "such an
>old
>release".  Consider users who depend on clients (SVNKit) that don't
>yet have 1.7 native support (i.e. Subclipse).  We have to stay on 
>1.6 until ALL our clients support 1.7 due to the working copy 
>restructuring.  When 1.7 came out I saved a copy of the 1.6.17 
>distribution locally.

Seems that I stepped on some nerves due to my poor choice of wording. Sorry about that.

All I really wanted to know was why it was important to hang back from the latest available version when getting the older one was less than trivial. Not using anything more than the command line for svn (infrequently at that) made me forget how often that project changes formats in the working copies and the ramifications of that behavior.

Thanks for enlightening me. :-)

-Jeremy

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple