Why is Synaptic version of Subversion not upgradeable?... and a question on forum mail handling

Thu Jul 30 12:49:12 UTC 2009

Michael

If you are working with Eclipse you can install an SVN client in Eclipse
http://www.eclipse.org/subversive/

Shahar
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Michael DeBari 
  To: ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com 
  Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 3:05 PM
  Subject: Re: Why is Synaptic version of Subversion not upgradeable?... and a question on forum mail handling

    Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 23:02:20 -0500
    From: Andrew Farris <flyindragon1 at aol.com>
    Subject: Re: Why is Synaptic version of Subversion not upgradeable?
    To: "Ubuntu user technical support,     not for general discussions"
           <ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com>
    Message-ID: <1248926540.22930.96.camel at BEC-LIN>
    Content-Type: text/plain

    On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 21:42 -0500, bill walton wrote:
    > On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 19:41 -0700, NoOp wrote:
    > > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/subversion
    >
    > Thank you.  It looks, from this, as though there might be a way out of
    > this for me without completely disrupting our product development cycle.
    > I appreciate the assistance.
    >
    > Just for the record, many application developers, myself among them, are
    > not Unix 'gods' and are just looking for a stable platform on which we
    > can depend not to force us to break our delivery commitments just
    > because MS, or whoever, says it's time to change.
    >

    You dont have to be a Unix 'god' in order to keep your software up to
    date. I don't seem to have any problems, and I'm not even a programmer,
    let alone a guru of any kind (the linux FS structure still confuses the
    hell out of me, for instance)

    > The thing that brought me to Ubuntu a couple of years ago was something
    > I read that said, I thought, that Canonical intended to make it the
    > desktop of choice.  Perhaps I misread.  Seems from the comments here it
    > must have said 'Linux desktop of choice.'  If that's all it aspires to,
    > I can only ask, who in their right mind aspires to be the biggest
    > midget?  It's a shame the package manager isn't better.

    Just to make something clear: As someone pointed out earlier, the
    new-ness of the packages that are available through the package manager
    are governed by 2 things--
       1. The Ubuntu Release cycle, and
       2. The desire of a volunteer to package it
    (emphasis on part 2). As you may (or may not) know, just before a new
    version of ubuntu is released (every 6 months), the features (and
    software versions in the repos) are frozen, making them the 'only'
    version available for that particular release, and from then on they are
    only updated for severe bug-fixes, and security patches. This process
    makes it easier to identify and fix bugs related to particular software
    versions, and ensure that the software isn't introducing any security
    vulnerabilities into the system.

    However, as many people like to walk that bleeding edge with the
    software they run, often times you will find that packages which receive
    significant updates will be placed in the 'backports' repo. Enabling
    this repo gets you closer to the current version of a lot of software,
    and the packages are generally of release quality (I've never had an
    issue with them).

    In addition, if that still isn't enough, then there are lots of special
    package repos on launchpad for specific apps (including subversion, as
    you have found) that you can simply add to your sources list to keep
    specific software even closer to the wet edge of that knife, w/o
    jeopardizing the other parts of your system (seems to be the solution
    best tailored to your situation).

    Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), every
    single package in any repo that gets uploaded, must also be re-compiled,
    re-tested, and re-packaged by someone (a volunteer) that devotes some of
    their free time to doing so.  Yes, this means that the software may be a
    little out of date sometimes, but this is the price you pay for the
    convenience of having someone else package it for you.

    The problem that you've encountered isn't, then, an issue with the
    package manager. Rather, you've got an issue with the policies/practices
    that keep the package manager populated with easy, convenient packages
    for you to install. More volunteers to check/package software would fix
    this 'issue,' but the fact of the matter is that the existing methods
    for getting new software already meet or exceed the needs of the vast
    majority of ubuntu's users. You can never expect to please /everyone/
    (shouldn't stop you from trying), so the best you can do is please the
    majority.

    I mean really...do you have to be a 'unix god' to go into "system >
    administration > software sources | updates > (check)Unsupported
    updates(backports)"? this doesn't break your system, nor does it take
    hours to upgrade.

    Just as easy is the option to add a subversion repo to "3rd party
    software" to keep this 'core development tool' of yours fully in-line
    with the newest versions available. It's a one-time set up that takes
    maybe 5min to do, and lets you stay completely hands-off till the repo
    shuts down (presumably after several decades, or a few major releases).
    I fail to see how this method is inferior to the MS way of doing
    things.

    And regardless of the fact that subversion is a 'core development tool',
    you have to keep in mind that not everyone that uses Ubuntu is a
    software developer, so the vast majority of users will never need an
    install of subversion that's up to date.

    I can understand your situation, but at the same time the Ubuntu
    packaging policies serve a lot of good purposes(namely keeping your
    platform stable and secure :))...and the alternatives (if the policies
    don't work for you) aren't difficult to implement at all, so I don't see
    where the snippy comments about having to be a 'unix god' to have
    up-to-date software, that the package manager sucks, and the comments
    concerning midgets were justified. Linux is the behind in the desktop
    market for a lot more reasons than because 'the package manager could be
    better'... and the other companies' 10-15 year head start, and enormous
    marketing budgets (as opposed to little/no marketing for linux) are
    probably pretty close to the top of that list.

    Sorry for the rant... I'm tired from work, your thread struck a cord in
    my mind, and I couldn't let go. I'm not trying to offend or anything, i
    just wanted to make my stance known...

    so there :D

    --
    Andrew
    _____________________________

  Such a gentle rant is surely justified. I'm two weeks new to Ubuntu (Ubuntu 8.10 _Intrepid Ibex) and I just got Eclipse 3.4.1 up and running with the awesome help of this forum and PPA repo (OK, and a few other sources) despite the vanilla Ubuntu package only being 3.2. Subversion is next in line since I need SCC for my development as well. Beats the hell out of trying to get help in the MS world.

  Now for a question...I have the message digest form of this list delivered to my gmail. Any nifty method for replying to specific posts without cutting and pasting each time?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  -- 
  ubuntu-users mailing list
  ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
  Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20090730/cca99abd/attachment.html>