apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@lyra.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] apr-client
Date Thu, 27 Sep 2001 00:10:37 GMT
On Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 07:36:50PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > I agree with Roy about this.  This doesn't really have anything to do
> > with creating a portability run-time.  It really should be an httpd
> > sub-project.
> 
> The only distinction I can make in my mind is library versus application.
> Around these here parts, when we think library, we (reflexively) think
> APR.  I mean come on, most of the stuff in apr-util has nothing to do with
> portability.

Per my other post, that is the difference between "portability" and
"portable." All the APR* code is portable, and APR itself is the means for
portability.

:-)

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

Mime
View raw message