Hi Hyrum, et al, I am just shooting from the hip.... But I seem to remember a previous discussion that went along the lines of "pre-building" development environments.
I "thought" - the plan was to use the deps collection and supply a (insert compiler brand / version here) configuration file. As an attempt to help in this exact scenario. (being able to build the source for one's self) With the caveat of; "I haven't done a search for that discussion"... Surely, it wouldn't be too onerous a task either? I.e. "Bill Smith" uses Visual C 6 and compiles for XP. Here is Bill's VC6 configuration / build / batch file. "John Smith" uses.... etc.. As with everything open-source - it comes with a buyer beware clause etc... But ultimately we end up with some compiler configuration files / batch files / shell scripts (whatever is appropriate for the method used to build) - that if you use the standard deps collection "should" (but for path alterations - perhaps) see you in a state of being able to compile the svn source tree for yourself. At worst it gives you a starting point and significantly lowers a pretty significant barrier to obtaining more contributors / testers for the project. Despite Daniel Shahaf sending me his configuration file and offering some ongoing help .. I am still yet to successfully compile SVN. And I have been loitering around the project for a considerable amount of time - obviously in a non development role.... but none the less.... Gavin. On 29/07/2010, at 12:43 PM, Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Talden <tal...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> It looks like we might be fairly close to having on-disk formats >>> stabilized, and hence rolling alphas. Prereleases may be fairly >>> prolific, since I want to work the bugs out of the transition to ASF >>> distribution infrastructure, and get fixes into the hands of users >>> rapidly. >> >> I'm very interested in experimenting with the alphas. I have little >> time or interest in building subversion myself (last time I looked at >> that in ~1.3 days, getting the appropriate tools, dependencies and >> environment set up was like gnawing off my own leg) but I'd very much >> like to perform some scripted experiments using our corporate >> repository content (a copy of course) with 1.7 on Win32 and Win64. > > The project doesn't typically provide binaries, partly because there > are so many different combinations that it's hard to justify which > ones to build and which not too. > > However, providing binaries of these releases may be really useful, > especially for people in your position. I *really* hope that our > volunteer packagers chose to build binaries of these interim releases > (with the appropriate warnings, of course). It would also be nice if > third-parties (such as Tortoise) used these as part of their own beta > processes. > >> 1.7 sounds very promising and it would be great to get an early look >> at the progress made and maybe help shake out the bugs. >> >> -- >> Talden >>
