> > > > > Huh? sdbm.h is exported by APRUTIL. It is a publically available
export. Or,
> > > > > it should be at least.
> > > >
> > > > Then the header name at the very least needs to change. As it is now,
if
> > > > we install Apache on a machine that already has sdbm, we will break things
> > > > horribly.
> > >
> > > Well, that's always been the case :-)
> > >
> > > Hmm. I don't think that I'd have a problem renaming SDBM entry points and
> > > the header to apr_sdbm. I'll go put a line into the STATUS file for voting
> > > input.
> >
> > This shouldn't require a vote. What we have now is broken, and we are in
> > commit then review mode.
>
> Require? No... probably not. Considerate? Yes :-)
>
> For changes that revamp existing APIs, I prefer to ask. Not always,
> unfortunately, but when I think about it, I like to.
>
> In this case, somebody may have an alternate opinion on what to do. For
> example, Bill's initial suggestion was to simply hide SDBM altogether and
> make people use apr_dbm_* to access it. I'd prefer to expose SDBM since we
> have the darn thing, and then make apr_dbm separately available for people
> that don't have a specific requirement on what DBM gets used.
I wasn't actually thinking of renaming the entry points right now. Right
now, I just want to get the header file renamed, because it is invalid to
install it as it is now. The entry point change can wait a few days, but
if we are going to release an Apache alpha on Monday, the file name needs
to change before we release the alpha.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|