W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > December 2002

Re: problems installing cvs version

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:02:12 +0100
To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
cc: Wim Fournier <w3c@hsmade.com>, Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
Message-ID: <a01060007-1022-6C30972F0E6011D79AE800039300CF5C@[193.157.66.10]>

Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi> wrote:

>On Thu, 2002-12-12 at 12:08, Wim Fournier wrote:
>
>>I just installed the cvs version of the w3c validator. After wrestling
>>through getting it to work [and failing].
>
>[...] I guess you're running the HEAD version of validator?  I
>wouldn't recommend that (of course not knowing your intentions) for
>anything else but validator development, it's in a unstable state
>currently, with some biggish changes already happened and AFAICT
>some coming up.  See validator-0_6_0-branch instead if you're
>setting up a validator for validating stuff :)

Yes. HEAD is more or less guaranteed to be broken at any given point in
time. Stable code is branched off towards a release, such as the currently
stable "validator-0_6_0-branch". You can get it by giving cvs:

  cvs get -r validator-0_6_0-branch validator


>Yes, the branches should really be documented more prominently on
>validator.w3.org (if they're documented at all at the moment...).

They aren't documented and, worse, the source download page points people
at HEAD instead of the branch. :-(

-- 
By definition there is _no_way_ any problem can be my fault. Any problems
you think you can find in my code are in your imagination. If you continue
with such derranged imaginings then I may be forced to perform corrective
brain surgery... with an axe!                            -- Stephen Harris
Received on Friday, 13 December 2002 01:02:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:05 GMT