Mailing-List: contact dev-help@subversion.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1697654 - /subversion/branches/1.9.x/STATUS
References: <20150825114910.3BE91AC05CA@hades.apache.org>
 <55DC57B3.5050009@wandisco.com>
 <CA+t0gk06CirGTDDt+_jHe+dWU-PHt0nzu0DMmX4Z6j2zQSwLCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Subversion Development <dev@subversion.apache.org>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Branko_=c4=8cibej?= <brane@wandisco.com>
Organization: WANdisco
Message-ID: <55DC8D0A.3010606@wandisco.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:43:06 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+t0gk06CirGTDDt+_jHe+dWU-PHt0nzu0DMmX4Z6j2zQSwLCw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 25.08.2015 17:31, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Branko Čibej <brane@wandisco.com> wrote:
>
>> On 25.08.2015 13:49, brane@apache.org wrote:
>>> Author: brane
>>> Date: Tue Aug 25 11:49:09 2015
>>> New Revision: 1697654
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1697654
>>> Log:
>>> * branches/1.9.x/STATUS:
>>>    - Approve r1693886.
>>>    - Temporarily veto r1694481; the change looks broken.
>> [...]
>>
>>> @@ -98,5 +84,22 @@ Candidate changes:
>>>  Veto-blocked changes:
>>>  =====================
>>>
>>> + * r1694481
>>> +   Fix Unix build on systems without GPG agent.
>>> +   Justification:
>>> +     This is a user-reported issue.
>>> +   Votes:
>>> +     +1: stefan2, philip
>>> +     -1: brane (You can't just remove a public API implementation,
>>> +                even if it is deprecated. And the prototyps is still
>>> +                right there in svn_auth.h)
>>> +
>>>  Approved changes:
>>>  =================
>> r1694481 (conditionally) removes the implementation of a public API,
>> whilst leaving the prototype in svn_auth.h untouched. This is a
>> violation of our ABI compatibility rules, and also a linking error
>> waiting to happen.
>>
> Except that the very problem is that
> svn_auth__get_gpg_agent_simple_provider
> is not implemented either if SVN_HAVE_GPG_AGENT
> is not defined. And that linker problem is the one being
> already reported and fixed by the patch.
>
> You are still right that we introduce another linker problem
> further down the road for some people that stumbled
> across the first one in the past. And not implementing
> the public API is a bad thing.
>
> So, I think we need to do some coding to fix this on /trunk.
> Question is whether we want to skip r1694481 as a  stop-
> gap patch for 1.9.1 and enable people to build SVN again.


Daniel suggested inserting a dummy handler if we don't have the GPG
agent support. I think that may be the only reasonable solution for both
trunk and 1.9.1 (or .x if we don't thing it's important enough for .1).

The real effort here is double-checking that a dummy handler won't break
credentials resolution.

-- Brane