From users-return-1328-daniel=haxx.se@subversion.apache.org Tue Mar 2 16:58:13 2010 Return-Path: Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by giant.haxx.se (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9) with SMTP id o22FwBZr004261 for ; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 16:58:12 +0100 Received: (qmail 12967 invoked by uid 500); 2 Mar 2010 15:58:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@subversion.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list users@subversion.apache.org Received: (qmail 12960 invoked by uid 99); 2 Mar 2010 15:58:07 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:58:07 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of kmradke@rockwellcollins.com designates 205.175.225.241 as permitted sender) Received: from [205.175.225.241] (HELO secvs02.rockwellcollins.com) (205.175.225.241) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:57:57 +0000 Received: from secvs02.rockwellcollins.com (secvs02.rockwellcollins.com [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A67AFB1FD; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 09:57:36 -0600 (CST) Received: from collinscrsmtp02.rockwellcollins.com (collinscrsmtp02.rockwellcollins.com [131.198.63.133]) by secvs02.rockwellcollins.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F792FB1D3; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 09:57:36 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <009701cab9b2$5a7dedc0$0f79c940$@com> To: "Troy Simpson" Cc: "'Olivier Sannier'" , "'sNop'" , users@subversion.apache.org Subject: RE: Tigris binary packages for Windows MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004 From: kmradke@rockwellcollins.com X-MIMETrack: S/MIME Sign by Notes Client on Kevin M Radke/CedarRapids/RockwellCollins(Release 6.5.2|June 01, 2004) at 03/02/2010 09:57:33 AM, Serialize by Notes Client on Kevin M Radke/CedarRapids/RockwellCollins(Release 6.5.2|June 01, 2004) at 03/02/2010 09:57:33 AM, Serialize complete at 03/02/2010 09:57:33 AM, S/MIME Sign failed at 03/02/2010 09:57:33 AM: The cryptographic key was not found, Serialize by Router on CollinsCRSMTP02/CedarRapids/RockwellCollins(Release 8.5.1FP1|January 05, 2010) at 03/02/2010 09:57:35 AM, Serialize complete at 03/02/2010 09:57:35 AM Message-ID: Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 09:57:34 -0600 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0057AAA2862576DA_=" X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 0057AAA2862576DA_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Troy Simpson" wrote on 03/01/2010 08:44:54 PM: > I can still build the installer, but I have never built binaries. =20 > The installer code in the repository is NOT the latest code. I had=20 > lost commit access for a time during the transition and by the time=20 > I got that access back there are no more binaries, so it has been=20 > pointless to continue development. If someone could produce=20 > binaries I could get the installer back on track, otherwise it?s not > worth spending any time on if the project will not support (as in=20 > supply) windows binaries. >=20 > I was advised to discuss this on the dev list, which is what I did,=20 > however there has been zero response. There is more discussion on=20 > the user end than the developer end. If anyone in user-land has the > capability to construct the binaries in a similar fashion to the way > they were produced before, I for one would bring this to the=20 > attention of the developer list if nobody else does. It is my=20 > opinion that the project should have a ?supported? release to assist > with bug finding and to provide end-users with a standard base-level=20 release. I too posted a question about the windows build process, but without the recipe, I just haven't found the time to dig into it myself. (I created my virtual machine, but wasn't even sure what build tool versions were preferred.) I believe there are windows binaries generated by the windows build bots. Not sure if the build bots run on the release branches for all platforms, but that could probably be remedied. No idea if those binaries are built in a compatible way to the previous release ones... There was some discussion if some of the Apache infrastructure could be used for the build. Not sure if that was resolved or pursued. If I remember correctly, DJ's build machine completely died and is the main reason he was unable to perform the build. Kevin R. --=_alternative 0057AAA2862576DA_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
"Troy Simpson" <troy@ebswift.com> wrote on 03/01/2010 08:44:54 PM:
> I can still build the installer, but I have never built binaries. 
> The installer code in the repository is NOT the latest code.  I had
> lost commit access for a time during the transition and by the time
> I got that access back there are no more binaries, so it has been
> pointless to continue development.  If someone could produce
> binaries I could get the installer back on track, otherwise it’s not
> worth spending any time on if the project will not support (as in
> supply) windows binaries.
>  
> I was advised to discuss this on the dev list, which is what I did,
> however there has been zero response.  There is more discussion on
> the user end than the developer end.  If anyone in user-land has the
> capability to construct the binaries in a similar fashion to the way > they were produced before, I for one would bring this to the
> attention of the developer list if nobody else does.  It is my
> opinion that the project should have a ‘supported’ release= to assist
> with bug finding and to provide end-users with a standard base-level release.

I too posted a question about the windows build proc= ess, but without
the recipe, I just haven't found the time to dig into it myself.
(I created my virtual machine, but wasn't even sure what build tool
 versions were preferred.)

I believe there are windows binaries generated by the windows build bots.
Not sure if the build bots run on the release branch= es for all platforms,
but that could probably be remedied.  No idea if those binaries
are built in a compatible way to the previous release ones...

There was some discussion if some of the Apache infr= astructure could
be used for the build.  Not sure if that was resolved or pursued.

If I remember correctly, DJ's build machine complete= ly died and is the
main reason he was unable to perform the build.=

Kevin R. --=_alternative 0057AAA2862576DA_=--