apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David reid" <da...@jetnet.co.uk>
Subject Re: documented 1.0 showstoppers
Date Thu, 03 Jun 2004 22:20:26 GMT
> On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 01:35:06PM -0400, rbb@rkbloom.net wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> > Can we fix it in 2.0?  Sure.  No reason that a 1.0 release prevents
>> that.
>> > And, we might be able to fix it in 1.1, but it depends how we handle
>> the
>> > specifics.  However, 1.0 does not have to be perfect!
>> It can't be fixed in 1.1, because the whole API needs to be re-thought.
>> As for why I haven't fixed it yet, I don't have the time.  I'm really
>> sorry, but a new job and a new child kind of do that to you.  I'm not
>> asking 1.0 to be perfect, but I am asking that we not release an API
>> that
>> we know for a fact does not work.  That just isn't honest to our users.
> As Justin pointed out, the users seem to be just fine with it sitting in
> there. *TODAY*. So why would they suddenly be unhappy with it tomorrow?
> Release the damned thing as-is.
> 1.0.0 won't be perfect, but maybe 1.0.1 or 1.1.0 or 2.0.0 will be. As Jeff
> says, we'll never get there, and never find out at this rate.

Well, let's have a look at what's been proposed and see what makes sense.
While I respect Justin's ideas of simply rolling, we have waited a LONG
time for a 1.0 release so why jump at this point? The point of the
timetable and it's 2 phases is to build in "thinking" time to try and get
as many of these issues aired and resolved prior to a 1.0 release.

Remember we'll be living with the API for the entire 1.0 series, so if the
PAI needs to be changed, even at this stage, then we should do it. If the
1.0 release has code that "works, but isn't prefect" then as far I'm
concerned that's OK because, as others have pointed out, 1.0.1 or 1.1 can
fix that code. The API however can't be messed with.

As soon as I'm back in the land of internet connections for my alptop I'll
have a look at it, though I'm guessing(hoping) others will beat me to it


View raw message