[sword-devel] Packagers Take Note

Greg Hellings greg.hellings at gmail.com
Wed Nov 2 08:22:20 MST 2011

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Jaak Ristioja <jaak at ristioja.ee> wrote:
> On 02.11.2011 17:06, Greg Hellings wrote:
>> I don't know all the appropriate emails for SWORD packagers, but
>> figured this is as good a place as any to put out this notice.
>> SWORD SVN contains a few commits which should be interesting from the
>> point of view of packagers for Linux distributions. While the current
>> SVN is not directly compatible with the latest release of SWORD
>> (1.6.2), interested parties should take note of commits 2661, 2662 and
>> 2665 when packaging. These commits introduce compatibility with
>> CLucene version 2.x while maintaining backwards compatibility with
>> version 0.9x.  Additionally, commit 2665 fixes a major bug in the
>> CMake build chain. Versions of the library without commit 2665 which
>> are built with CMake will detect CLucene during configure but will not
>> build against it, leaving the library with limited search
>> capabilities.
>> Anyone who used CMake in the past or who packages for a system with
>> CLucene 2 is encouraged to take a look at these three commits and
>> backport them to your patch system until the next release of the SWORD
>> library which ought to include these commits.
>> Thanks,
>> Greg
> I guess packagers would prefer a release instead of messing around with
> patches ripped from "random" SVN commits. When will the next version be
> released?

They might, but maintaining patch sets is routinely a part of
packaging activities, and pulling them out of SVN is not uncommon and
prevents packagers from needing to maintain their own.

At this point it would be very cumbersome to release a 1.6.3 that
maintained the requirements SWORD has set out for minor-only version
increments (API compat? ABI compat?) because Troy would need to cherry
pick through all the post-1.6.2 commits to only pull the ones which
are bug fixes. He also isn't convinced that there is, as yet, enough
new features in SVN to warrant a 1.7.0 release.

Of course this might have been easier if we had initially
branched/tagged when 1.6.2 was released, but that's all water under
the bridge by this point.


> Best regards,
> Jaak
> _______________________________________________
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page

More information about the sword-devel mailing list