SVNAdaptor from Tigris

[Tom Zeller]

>>Just to confirm my understanding, the current plan is to add svnkit.jar to
>>the pom as "provided" ?
>
> I thought Tom made a good argument for that.

When we talked I was thinking about "Coping with Sun JARs" [1], but
"provided" really means provided by the JDK or container which is not
exactly our use case.

Other folks have dealt with the SVNkit license as well [2] [3].

Just signaling that I might very well be wrong, and marking the
dependency as optional and omitting from the assembly may be the
correct path, as we discussed.

[1] https://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-coping-with-sun-jars.html

[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-45

[3] http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/maven-scm-provider-svnjava/