apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Erenkrantz <jus...@erenkrantz.com>
Subject Re: 2.2 roadmap with respect to APR was Re: [NOTICE] CVS to SVN
Date Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:30:41 GMT
--On Monday, November 22, 2004 1:08 PM -0600 "William A. Rowe, Jr." 
<wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:

>> That *will* affect the 2.2 uptake rate because our third parties will
>> take a lot of time to get their modules 64-bit clean (if they do at all).
> WHO CARES?!?  That's on them.  They can release bug fixes after
> bug fixes, or extend their list of tested/supported platforms
> as they get around to it.  It's their problem.

No, but as we learned from 2.0, third-party modules have a direct impact on 
the uptake rate.  So, making it harder for third-parties to port would make 
it much harder to see 2.2 in deployment.

> As it stands, WE will be in THEIR WAY with incorrect code in apr
> and httpd.  At that point - they cannot address the problems until
> we release the next version minor (2.4 or 3.0).  How unfair is that?

2.0 has the same problem and I've yet to see any real complaints.

I don't want to see 2.2 be the 'end-all-be-all' - I want 2.2 to be a usable 
and incremental improvement over 2.0.

>> I still think this needs to be punted to 2.4.  It's just *way* too big.
> Way too big for you to handle?  Ok.  Not asking you to develop,
> test or even review.

Way too big for third-parties to handle easily.

>> We'll also have to fix up all of httpd to be 64-bit clean.
> Not hard.

So say you without any code to back that statement up.  We don't even know 
the extent of the changes at this point.

> It's pointless arguing this aspect.  Are we done with 2.2?  If you
> want to vote on 2.2 - then vote on 2.2 - don't get in the way of
> other developers' progress with hand waving.  That, I think, is the
> biggest lesson I took out of the httpd luncheons.

No offense, but I see you holding up the development by saying that 2.2 
must wait for changes that aren't even written nor likely to be quickly 
accomplished and tested.  -- justin

View raw message