For the record, I've gone ahead and removed the deps tarball creation from our rolling script. As of r945390, dist.sh won't create any dist tarballs, but there is a new get-deps.sh script to help folks fetch the right deps from a Subversion distribution.
I've rerun my nightly script with the new dist scripts: http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/nightly/ Starting with the 1.7.x pre-releases, we'll use this tarball creation mechanism. -Hyrum On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Hyrum K. Wright < hyrum_wri...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Joe Swatosh <joe.swat...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Hyrum K. Wright >> <hyrum_wri...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote: >> > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Hyrum K. Wright < >> > hyrum_wri...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Mark Phippard <markp...@gmail.com >> >wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Hyrum K. Wright >> >>> <hyrum_wri...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote: >> >>> > This looks like a good location, do you know what needs to happen so >> I >> >>> can >> >>> > get the appropriate privs to upload to the subversion/ directory >> there? >> >>> > >> >>> > Also, I'm planning on just putting the release tarballs, not the >> deps >> >>> > tarballs. Any reason why we should include the deps tarballs? >> >>> >> >>> I was under the impression we couldn't post it unless we remove Neon >> >>> and maybe other parts. >> >>> >> >>> Personally, I think this is a good opportunity to stop making it. >> >>> >> >> >> >> I would *love* to stop shipping the deps, and would be happy to make >> this >> >> happen as part of the 1.7 release cycle. It would be nice to hear from >> our >> >> users / packages / 3rd-party-clients to find out if they actually use >> or >> >> care about the deps tarballs before we banish them, however. >> >> >> > >> > As I've gone back and reviewed this thread, it seems that sentiment >> seems to >> > be leaning in favor of dropping the deps tarballs from our distribution. >> > I'm inclined to follow that path, and will make the needed changes to >> our >> > distribution scripts to remove them. If you have objections, please >> make >> > them known. >> > >> > (Note: this would only be in preparation for the 1.7 release. 1.6.x >> will >> > continue to ship with the deps tarballs.) >> > >> >> Hi Hyrum, >> >> As one of the (probably) few (on list) users of the deps tarballs, I >> have no problem with dropping them. If that is the decision however, >> I'd like to suggest that we should be very clear about what versions >> of the dependencies we "recommend" (which is approximately how I >> treated the deps until now), and we should also include links to where >> that version is available (at least at the time that our release >> ships). >> > > Thanks for the input. The "canonical" source for the deps versions is the > distribution scripts: > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/branches/1.6.x/tools/dist/construct-rolling-environment.sh > > However, I actually use a local copy of that script when rolling deps, and > it is occasionally updated with newer versions when the situations warrants > (such as with the recent zlib releases). Those updates get committed to > trunk, but rarely do they get backported to the branch. > > >> After a bit of googling, I found all the dependencies in 1.6.11, but >> it wasn't easy in every case. >> >> For the record: >> http://archive.apache.org/dist/apr/ >> http://zlib.net/fossils/ >> http://serf.googlecode.com/files/ >> http://www.webdav.org/neon/history.html >> http://www.sqlite.org/download.html >> (Not in the deps tarball, but a dependency none the less: I've been >> using the prebuilt bdb for windows from the tigris site. I'll >> probably have to figure out how to build it RSN. >> >> http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/berkeley-db/db/index.html >> ). >> > > Berkeley DB isn't considered a "strict" dependency, since you can build a > fully-functioning Subversion without it. The same could probably be said of > neon and serf, but for historical reasons, we include them. > > It sounds like dropping deps is acceptable. I'm going to update the > rolling script on 1.6.x to the appropriate versions, and then start hacking > the trunk distribution scripts to not create the deps tarball. > > -Hyrum >
