On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 18:30, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 12:34:08PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > > > So what, in your opinion, are the technologies (or significant packages) > > > which should be in Debian but are not? And why do you think they are > > > not? > > > > Subversion. It's currently deliberately held out of sarge by an RC > > report, Branden Robinson requests violation of policy (adding > > debugging symbols) for it is alpha quality. However, this is no longer > > true, and next month 1.0 will be released. They have a very > > precise schedule, and tend to stick to it. > > > As I understand it, Subversion 0.37.0-1, uploaded to unstable yesterday, > should be able to get into testing. > Sadly not. 0.37.0-2, which might actually contain all of the files necessary to build it could though http://bugs.debian.org/230948 Scott -- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
Description: This is a digitally signed message part