[Developers] Accessing current source code

Arni Magnusson arnima at hafro.is
Thu Aug 19 12:12:33 PDT 2010

Hi Ben, these are valid points.

I'm not sure how old the 'public' SVN version is. It may date back to the 
last formal release of ADMB 9.1 (31 Dec 2009), equivalent to downloading 
and unzipping admb-9.1-src.zip. The reported SVN revision 74 makes no 
sense, as version 9.1 corresponds to revision 496.

Like you point out, this can be frustrating and undermines user 
participation in the development of ADMB. Similar free software projects 
have anonymous read-only access to the actual source repository, so anyone 
can view the code in real time.

That level of open source enforces development discipline; at any given 
time, build errors should be very rare and quickly fixed.

My guess is that ADMB has not reached that point, or has reached it very 
recently. If I checkout the source code right now, I wouldn't assume that 
it builds.


Oops, maybe I should checkout more often. It turns out that my entire 
email regarding the VERSION file was unnecessary: this feature has already 
been implemented, in r616 last May, using a file called VERSION and some 
makefile magic...

Well, that just supports the point Ben is making. He reads revision logs 
while having breakfast, so if the current source code was publicly 
available, he would know that ADMB 9.1-devel provides an easy way of 
retrieving the version number. Thus eliminating the need to send a 
redundant wishlist report.

Jon Schnute has also made this point, and surely others share their 
opinion. The user community includes a growing number of seasoned C++ 
programmers, and the best feedback we can get is code. ADMB was not ready 
for this a year ago, but we're probably ready for read-only access now.


On Thu, 19 Aug 2010, Ben Bolker wrote:

> Arni,
> how far ahead is the 'developer' SVN of the 'public' SVN?  I'm willing 
> to sign up as a 'beta tester' to get access to the 'developer' SVN, but 
> it actually really bugs me on general principles that there are two such 
> SVNs -- for this kind of open-source project, everyone should have 
> access (possibly read-only) to the latest development version ... that 
> also means that people who want to be on the bleeding edge can retrieve 
> and compile the latest development version without bothering the 
> developers.  It would also mean that anyone could submit patches to the 
> developers, without having to apply to become an official developer ...
> If I'm misunderstood the situation, or if the developer SVN is open to 
> the public somewhere and I've just missed it, please feel free to 
> correct me ...
> cheers
> Ben Bolker

More information about the Developers mailing list