On 07.04.2013 18:29, Geoff Rowell wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2013, at 11:58 AM, "Bert Huijben" wrote:
>
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Ben Reser [mailto:b...@reser.org]
>>> Sent: dinsdag 8 januari 2013 21:29
>>> To: Subversion Development
>>> Subject: Subversion & Windows
>>>
>>>
>>> 5) We c
On Apr 7, 2013, at 11:58 AM, "Bert Huijben" wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ben Reser [mailto:b...@reser.org]
>> Sent: dinsdag 8 januari 2013 21:29
>> To: Subversion Development
>> Subject: Subversion & Windows
>>
>>
>> 5) We could rewrite the build system to use something l
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Reser [mailto:b...@reser.org]
> Sent: dinsdag 8 januari 2013 21:29
> To: Subversion Development
> Subject: Subversion & Windows
>
> We seem to be having trouble getting releases out the door and the
> delay is almost always related to Windows votes.
>
>
On 14.01.2013 09:10, Andre Colomb wrote:
> Sorry, I forgot to put in the link:
> [1]: http://coapp.org
Thanks! I'll look at that.
-- Brane
> Andre Colomb wrote:
>> Branko Čibej wrote:
>>> JFTR, I'm putting together a set of Windows deveopment environments for
>>> trunk/1.8.
>>>
>>> The idea is t
Sorry, I forgot to put in the link:
[1]: http://coapp.org
Andre Colomb wrote:
> Branko Čibej wrote:
>> JFTR, I'm putting together a set of Windows deveopment environments for
>> trunk/1.8.
>>
>> The idea is to create several packages of pre-built dependencies (debug,
>> non-debug) x (vs2010, vs20
Branko Čibej wrote:
> JFTR, I'm putting together a set of Windows deveopment environments for
> trunk/1.8.
>
> The idea is to create several packages of pre-built dependencies (debug,
> non-debug) x (vs2010, vs2010) x (x86, x64) and one or two VM images.
Just in case you haven't heard of it yet,
JFTR, I'm putting together a set of Windows deveopment environments for
trunk/1.8.
The idea is to create several packages of pre-built dependencies (debug,
non-debug) x (vs2010, vs2010) x (x86, x64) and one or two VM images.
It's going to take a while.
-- Brane
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> We seem to be having trouble getting releases out the door and the
> delay is almost always related to Windows votes.
>
> Consider the following data:
> Release Planned Actual Unix vs Windows
> 1.6.19 10 Sep 2012
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 3:30 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> We talked about that a couple days ago, but the problem is that a
> Windows VM requires a Windows OS license for every user of that VM.
> That's not something we can provide or hack around (well ... we could
> hack around it, but it would be a
On 09.01.2013 07:32, Miha Vitorovic wrote:
> On 8.1.2013 21:28, Ben Reser wrote:
>> I think flat out the problem is that building on Windows is just a
>> pain. I remember it took me several days to get a working build
>> environment so I could be the last signature on 1.6.19. Unfortunately
>> I c
versions different from new ones. That by itself makes it
even less likely that you receive signatures for those old versions.
Bert
*From:* Justin Erenkrantz
*Sent:* January 9, 2013 4:36 AM
*To:* Ben Reser
*CC:* Subversion Development
*Subject:* Re: Subversion & Windows
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 a
On 8.1.2013 21:28, Ben Reser wrote:
I think flat out the problem is that building on Windows is just a
pain. I remember it took me several days to get a working build
environment so I could be the last signature on 1.6.19. Unfortunately
I can't be the last vote on the more recent releases becau
Ben Reser wrote on Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 22:08:11 -0800:
> Not so much because I don't trust us as because I know not everyone is
> running absolutely every test.
Speaking of which, I think nearly no one builds+tests with non-standard
flags, such as:
-DSVN_FS_FS_DEFAULT_MAX_FILES_PER_DIR=4
-DPACK_
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Can buildbot provide one of the votes?
Part of the problem with the Windows build is that developers upgrade
dependencies to meeting the trunk recommendations/requirements. Then
the new versions aren't supported by the old releases. The bui
Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 05:29:02 +0100:
> Explicit tests on that platform are, therefore, indispensable. And it should
> be two independent votes rather than one to make unclean / incomplete
> builds and environments less likely to mask issues. But given Ben's
> numbers, two v
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 4:36 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
>
>> Given stefan2's argument I don't think it's unreasonable to lower the
>> Windows votes, but I think removing them entirely is probably going
>> too far.
>>
>
> Given the fact that we
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> Given stefan2's argument I don't think it's unreasonable to lower the
> Windows votes, but I think removing them entirely is probably going
> too far.
>
Given the fact that we repeatedly have trouble securing votes just for
Windows, I think you
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> IMO, we should follow most other (all?) ASF projects - you need 3 +1s for
> release regardless of platform. The fact that we require 3 +1s just for
> Windows is very odd - we don't require 3 +1s for Mac and 3 +1s for RHEL and
> 3 +1s for
IMO, we should follow most other (all?) ASF projects - you need 3 +1s for
release regardless of platform. The fact that we require 3 +1s just for
Windows is very odd - we don't require 3 +1s for Mac and 3 +1s for RHEL and
3 +1s for Ubuntu, etc. -- justin
On Jan 8, 2013 3:29 PM, "Ben Reser" wrote
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> I think the problem is worse with 1.6. At least I myself was
> absolutely not looking forward to testing another release of 1.6 (but
> did it anyway, after a week or so of waiting). As you say, setting up
> a build environment for Subversion
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> We seem to be having trouble getting releases out the door and the
> delay is almost always related to Windows votes.
>
> Consider the following data:
> Release Planned Actual Unix vs Windows
> 1.6.19 10 Sep 2012
21 matches
Mail list logo
