apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stas Bekman <s...@stason.org>
Subject Re: documented 1.0 showstoppers
Date Fri, 04 Jun 2004 20:18:57 GMT
Greg Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 12:43:22PM -0700, Stas Bekman wrote:
> 
>>...
>>You have a problem here, 1.0.1 will have to be backwards compatible with 
>>1.0.0. So if now you have API problems which went so far unnoticed (or 
>>ignored) you can't commit to them in 1.0.0.
> 
> 
> You're assuming that a problem in the API exists. But you also talk about
> "coverage" which is generally about the implementation.

True, I was mixing two different issues, but it's quite often the case, that 
the two are related. Without testing the API you can't know whether it's good, 
or whether it sucks, regardless the implementation issue.

> Implementation bugs are easy to fix in a 1.0.1. API changes would require
> a 1.1 release. Which we can also do IF we find a problem.

You forget about other projects that rely on apr and can't just bump up the 
requirement to 1.1 since they have to support older Apache's which still use 
1.0 (or pre-1.0). Given this fact those projects will need to spend tons of 
time trying to support both versions, which is just a plain waste of time. And 
you aren't even willing to consider that. It's certainly easy for projects 
that rely only on apr, and not Apache. Or those who can easily drop support 
for older Apache versions.

-- 
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman            JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/     mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org   http://ticketmaster.com

Mime
View raw message