Branko Čibej wrote on Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 17:15:10 +0100: > On 27.11.2013 17:09, Mark Phippard wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nka...@gmail.com > > <mailto:nka...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Daniel Shahaf > > <d...@daniel.shahaf.name <mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name>> wrote: > > > Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote on Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 21:17:11 -0500: > > >> I've gone ahead and updated, and casually tested, my published > > RHEL 6 > > >> compatible RPM building tools with a new 1.8.5 tag at: > > >> > > >> > > https://github.com/nkadel/subversion-1.8.x-srpm/tree/1.8.5-0.1 > > > > > > Perhaps these should be linked to from > > http://subversion.apache.org/packages? > > > > I'd welcome that. They don't contain binary RPM's, partly because I'm > > not in a good position to run a secure binary repository with GPG keys > > and fully controlled build environments. But they're very useful RPM > > building toolkits for developers, and I've sent notes to RHEL and > > Fedora about issues I've found.. I've also submitted them to Repoforge > > in the past: looks like time to update those rquests. > > > > > > I think it would be very confusing to include this with our binary > > packages. This is not a binary package so why would it belong on that > > list? > > > > Wouldn't it make more sense to add a section to INSTALL that points to > > this along with appropriate instructions for using it? Even if that > > just says to read the current README? > > Meh. Just remove "binary" from the page title and you're done.
While at it, we could also list the other known alternate build systems: - AnkhSVN's svn build script - TortoiseSVN's svn build script - tools/dev/unix-build/ - tools/dev/windows-build/
