Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evo svn head requires libgtkhtml-3.14 >= 3.16.0' but gtkhtml svn head is Version: 3.15.92

[Srinivasa Ragavan <sragavan novell com>]

On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 08:33 +0200, Jules Colding wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 10:07 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 14:34 +0200, Jules Colding wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 08:23 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 12:11 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> > > > > This also would do. But normally we would bump it during the next dot
> > > > > release. Anyways is fine IMO.
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Srini,
> > > > 
> > > > I think we still have a misunderstanding here.  The latest revision of
> > > > Subversion trunk still has the version in configure.in at 3.15.92 and
> > > > the latest ChangeLog entry is:
> > > > 
> > > >     2007-09-03  Srinivasa Ragavan  <sragavan novell com>
> > > > 
> > > >             ** GtkHTML 3.15.92 release
> > > > 
> > > >             * NEWS, configure.in:
> > > > 
> > > > But the latest ChangeLog entry in the 3.16.0 tarball is:
> > > > 
> > > >     2007-09-17  Srinivasa Ragavan  <sragavan novell com>
> > > > 
> > > >             ** GtkHTML 3.16.0 release
> > > > 
> > > >             * NEWS:
> > > >             * configure.in:
> > > > 
> > > > So it looks like at least the ChangeLog, NEWS, and configure.in changes
> > > > prior to the 3.16.0 tarball upload were never committed.
> > > 
> > > Which, BTW, is still the case for evolution (version 2.11.92 in svn) and
> > > e-d-s (version 1.11.92 in svn). The changes up to and including x.12.0
> > > must still be on someones disk.
> > 
> > It is there in gnome-2-20 branch as well. It isn't there in trunk. 
> 
> So the gnome-2-20 branch is further along than trunk?
Not exactly. Just that it wasn't committed here and now it is just
there.

-Srini.
>