On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 14:49, Sebastian Kayser <[email protected]> wrote:
> * Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Philip Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >> An idea for the change... from the perspective of the operating > > >> system, it won't be really a rename, there is still going to be a > > >> CSWpysvn package, only with a different content. > > > > > > > > > you say "only", but that is what makes it WORSE! :-/ > > > > Not necessarily. We ship library packages with multiple libraries in > > them. We potentially could ship both subversion-core and pysvn > > libraries in the same package. No renaming, but merging > > python-subversion libraries. It's a problem equivalent to the shared > > library problem, which is solved already. > > > > > I have said the order and timeline of what I think is the best path to > take. > > > That still stands. > > > > Your timeline means that submitpkg won't be able to generate > > changelists for $time_to_build_new_subversion_packages + one month. > > I'd like to operate quicker than that. Any problems with this > > approach? > > Any progress on the "new subversion/trac packages" front? I have had > internal requests for 1.6.6 (quite a bit of bugfixes [1] from our > current/ 1.6.2) and saw that a 1.6.5 build recipe with the adjusted > python bindings package name is already in GAR. > > Sebastian > > [1] http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/CHANGES > _______________________________________________ > maintainers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers > i compiled it and put it in testing - as we want to do that upgrade as well soon. i made it world writeable so anybody can overwrite it in case.
_______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
