apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Final counting approaches...
Date Fri, 08 Nov 2002 18:10:37 GMT
[Context: we are discussing the creation of an APACHE_2_0_RELEASE
branch and forking off API-breaking changes to a 2.1-dev branch.  Greg's
question goes to APR, which is why it's cc'ed.  Please keep this cross
posted thread about how Apache and APR versioning interact on topic :-]

At 11:01 AM 11/8/2002, Greg Ames wrote:
> What about apr?  the same?


APR isn't Apache, nor should it be.

I see the following happening to APR;

* Tag APACHE_2_0_44 just as we've done for every release *thus far*.

* Fork APACHE_2_0_BRANCH only within the httpd-2.0.

Now; once the APR project reaches 1.0, we can consider releasing 2.2.
APR will be following it's own well-defined versioning contract with
developers.  Any Apache 2.2+ will build under any APR 1.x until *we*
decide to break binary compatibility with APR 1.n-1 or prior (when we
choose to use some new API introduced in 1.n.)  If that breaks our
long-term compatibility goals, we can always kick off 2.4, requiring
the given APR 1.n.  This probably won't be required since the Apache
project hasn't put forward any forward compatibility guidelines.

Our APACHE_2_0_BRANCH may always use an APR 0.9.x.  If a security
patch requires an update to that 'final release' of APR 0.9.x, we can all
decide what to do about it then (perhaps create a maintenance fork from
APR 0.9.x.)

And the final option once APR is at 1.0 is to release an APR 1.0 release
of Apache 2.0.x.  We would break our own versioning rules for the 2.0.x
series, but folks haven't come to expect much stability out of 2.0 in the
first place.

If the APR project didn't believe it was close-ish to the 1.0 release, the
entire Apache versioning proposal wouldn't even be on the table :-)


View raw message