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: 1.0.0 RC5
Date Fri, 30 Jul 2004 13:18:16 GMT
Ryan Bloom wrote:

> I don't understand why this is still being discussed.  The patch makes
> sense, it solves a real problem and just needs to be committed and tested.
> +1 on adding it to 1.0.0RC5 so that we can get the release out.

OK by me. I did debate just including the patch and rolling, but figured 
I'd give it another airing first...
> However, we need to remove the APR_STATUS_IS_SUCCESS macro before 1.0 goes
> out, because otherwise we are stuck with it for a very long time.

There were win32 comments from Brane? Is someone going to commit the 
changes needed?


> Ryan
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 11:29:14 +0100, Max Bowsher <maxb@ukf.net> wrote:
>>David Reid wrote:
>>>The whole "release 1.0" movement seems to have run out of steam, so I
>>>propose that I'll just T&R what we have as RC5 and then if it works
>>>everywhere it'll be 1.0.0.
>>>Personally I think that releasing without the apr-config stuff in place
>>>would be a mistake, but there seem to be too many people raising
>>>obstacles to that for it to be sensible to wait. :(
>>It seems there is more apathy than obstacles.
>>Note that NO ONE has actually objected to any part of my patch except
>>whether the modified APR_FIND_FIND should have a mandatory or optional extra
>>Please, people, its a pretty simple patch, and it's a very important for
>>sane packaging.
>>Given the emphasis APR has placed on well-defined version compatibility,
>>publishing a defined set of rules, it would be a very great shame for 1.0.0
>>to actively hinder packagers from handling correct versioning of APR.
>>So, please, review!

View raw message