From dev-return-8901-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Sat Jan 04 00:28:40 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 79504 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jan 2003 00:28:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 79483 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2003 00:28:39 -0000 X-Authentication-Warning: kurgan.lyra.org: gstein set sender to gstein@lyra.org using -f Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 16:30:16 -0800 From: Greg Stein To: Justin Erenkrantz Cc: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: Apache release compatibility Message-ID: <20030103163015.A10757@lyra.org> Mail-Followup-To: Justin Erenkrantz , dev@apr.apache.org References: <3E15EA0F.9010305@xbc.nu> <85vg166lcw.fsf@newton.ch.collab.net> <0.1041630074@cite.ics.uci.edu> <20030103135212.D9965@lyra.org> <56020000.1041631012@cite.ics.uci.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <56020000.1041631012@cite.ics.uci.edu>; from jerenkrantz@apache.org on Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 01:56:52PM -0800 X-URL: http://www.lyra.org/greg/ X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 01:56:52PM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >... > --On Friday, January 03, 2003 13:52:12 -0800 Greg Stein > wrote: > > If I can find the time, then I'd like to do a formal release of 0.9.2 of > > apr(-util). That will certainly help us out a good bit. > > apr-util needs to be able to build without having apr in ../apr. That's > the showstopper, IMHO. Is that new from 0.9.1? If not, then 0.9.2 can go out the door, too. And is that requirement *just* for buildconf, or the actual build, too? > > Hmm? Are we saying that the APR API is "part of" the httpd API, so httpd > > won't upgrade to an APR that is missing functions? > > Yes. Any changes to APR that break binary compatibility can't be included > in any stable release of httpd-2.0 because a module could have used that > function. People have been very adamant about that requirement. -- justin Bah. APR should be able to go its own way. If httpd wants to stick with 0.9.9, then they can. And if we want to branch the pre-1.0 stuff to continue fixes for httpd, then fine. But APR 1.0 should drop the deprecated functions. APR cannot and should not be held hostage to httpd's requirements. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/