apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From <...@rkbloom.net>
Subject Re: documented 1.0 showstoppers
Date Thu, 03 Jun 2004 14:49:02 GMT

Here is a pointer to the e-mail:



On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Amit Athavale wrote:

> >
> >
> >>>The damned locking API can't work portably as things stand today.  It
> >>>wasn't designed to be portable, and it was never tested in a portable
> >>>manner.  I posted a possible solution for this, but got no feedback at all
> >>>on my idea.  I don't have the time to work on this right now, but it is a
> >>>showstopper, and I am -1 on releasing with this issue in the code.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Just to be clear: you can't veto a release.
> >>
> >>+1 for taking whatever the heck is in HEAD, say, in 2 weeks and calling it
> >>1.0.  This is *so* way overdue.  If people haven't fixed it by now, it won't
> >>get fixed anytime soon.  -- justin
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Dude, the API _can't_ work.  This isn't a matter of being able to slap a
> >fix on it.  The locking API isn't portable, and until it is changed in
> >some way, can't be made portable.  So, either we rip out the whole locking
> >API as unusable in a portable application or we fix it, but saying that we
> >are releasing a portable library with an API that we _know_ for a fact to
> >be non-portable is complete BS.
> >
> I agree with you on this.
> As a user of apr, I'll not like a major release of library (in this case
> 1.0) without
> important functionality such as locking either broken or dropped from a
> release.
> Instead users are happy using 0.x releases with known problems. If we
> are taking
> known problems from 0.xx releases to major release, what's the point in
> releasing ?
> As Ryan said 1.0 release of Apache *Portable* library with important
> functionality
> broken / non-*portable* seems contradicting.
> As far as locking API goes, for me (and I hope for large chunk of users)
> its very
> important functionality. In fact I use APR only for file-io, locking and
> shm.
> Ryan, could you dig out that possible solution for baby developers like
> me who have
> become active recently :)
> Cheers,
> ~Amit

View raw message