apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Erenkrantz <jus...@erenkrantz.com>
Subject Re: [REVIEW] issues for 1.0
Date Tue, 15 Jun 2004 10:13:30 GMT
--On Tuesday, June 15, 2004 10:59 AM +0100 David Reid <david@jetnet.co.uk> 
wrote:

> If we're happy that the API we have is fine, then we don't need a change.
> There seems to be a feeling it's not.
>
> Your strawman patch and Ryan's seem to be the 2 solutions proposed. We need
> to move this forward.

I think we need more input from others who know about our locking scheme if it 
is to make it into 1.0 (i.e. in two or three days).  I really believe a major 
change like this so late in the game needs 3 +1s...

> Again we need to decide if we're gonna do this as it'll be a change to the
> API.

I think it's good, but we just need someone to come up with a patch.

> Just seems a little pointless to return a status for functions that don't
> have a success/fail.

I think it's good, but we just need someone to come up with a patch.

;-)  -- justin

Mime
View raw message