On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Ivan Zhakov <i...@visualsvn.com> wrote:
> On 11 February 2015 at 00:28, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> > wrote: > > Ivan Zhakov wrote on Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 14:48:04 +0300: > >> On 10 February 2015 at 14:07, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> > wrote: > >> > Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 18:46:51 +0100: > >> >> Con: > >> >> - some people have seen the tool and may have used it > >> >> with its current name > >> >> > >> >> Neutral: > >> >> * renames have happened in the past (e.g. mucc -> svnmucc) > >> > > >> > For svnmucc, we add a symlink from the old location in Makefile.in: > >> > > >> > if test "$(DESTDIR)$(bindir)" != "$(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)"; then \ > >> > ln -sf $(bindir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT) > $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT); \ > >> > fi > >> > > >> > So you could do something similar for this rename. > >> I think that distro packagers who made unofficially released tool part > >> of they package could do this, but we should not add a symlink in > >> Subversion core. > > > > In 1.8, 'make install-tools' installs svn-bench. In 1.9, 'make install' > > will install svnbench. If 1.9 'make install-tools' doesn't create > > svn-bench as a symlink to svnbench, then we'll have broken compatibility > > for users of that makefile target. Therefore 'make install-tools' > > should create the symlink. The symlink won't be part of the core 'make > > install'. Makes sense? > > > I don't see problems to have 'make install-tools' to create symlink > for svn-bench to maintain compatibility with 1.8. > > And of course svn-bench should be renamed to svnbench. > Looks like we have a consensus. I'll do the changes Thursday morning. Thanks everyone how participated! -- Stefan^2.
