apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Erenkrantz <jus...@erenkrantz.com>
Subject 2.2 roadmap with respect to APR was Re: [NOTICE] CVS to SVN migration complete
Date Sat, 20 Nov 2004 05:03:14 GMT
--On Friday, November 19, 2004 8:01 PM -0600 "William A. Rowe, Jr." 
<wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:

> I'll offer compelling argument.  Allen offered patches, which
> Roy vetoed, to fix object sizes on 32/64/64 ILP bit platforms,
> and told Allen to go back and fix APR.
>
> That is the right answer, branch APR 1.x, fix on svn trunk (2.0.0)
> and commit the right code in httpd-2.2 such that an allocation
> of memory is consistently size_t and an allocation of disk is
> consistently off_t, and none of which has anything to do with int
> or long.

I don't believe that Allen would be able to complete his changes in a 
reasonable timeframe.  I'm tired of holding things up for a 'major' rewrite 
that'll come any day now (TM).  Sorry.  I'd be willing to give him a week or 
two to make the changes everywhere he needs to, but even then it'd be hard for 
all of us to review such a major change.

I'm in favor of releasing httpd 2.1 as 2.2 almost as-is with some relatively 
minor things thrown in (say the config re-org changes and the group hooks). 
However, trying to fix the 64-bit issues in a 2.2 (and with an APR 2.0) at 
this late state would make it really hard for our module writers to adopt 2.2 
in a timely manner.

So, my opinion is that we let Allen branch apr off now and let him go at it at 
a measured pace, but we shouldn't intend to hold httpd 2.2 for that.  -- justin

Mime
View raw message