Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Message-Id: <s1e7ac08.093@sinclair.provo.novell.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:24:49 -0700
From: "Brad Nicholes" <BNICHOLES@novell.com>
To: <justin@erenkrantz.com>,<chip@force-elite.com>
Cc: <dev@apr.apache.org>
Subject: Re: APR 1.1.0 Releasee Cycle?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

>> 3. What is the status on the APR LDAP & Start TLS work?
>
>Any 1.1.0 changes can't break the existing 1.0 LDAP API - my
understanding was
>that these changes would do exactly that.  -- justin

I don't believe that is true.  What exists today adds new APIs, it does
not change the existing ones.  At one point I suggested that the correct
way to fix the APIs would render them incompatible, but that is not what
exists in the code today.  I am able to swap APR 1.0 with 1.1-dev and
vise-versa without any problem.  I believe that there is still work to
be done on the implementation of the APIs, but I think the APIs
themselves are done.  Again, Graham needs to weigh-in on this to be sure
so that we don't release a new API new that still needs some work.

Brad

>>> Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com> Friday, January 14, 2005
10:02 AM >>>
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 07:53:34AM -0800, Paul Querna wrote:
> 1. Is the APR Multicast API stable enough to keep it the same until
> APR-2.0. (I think it is, and everyone who has commented on it so far
> agrees, but it is still 'new').

*nod*

> 2. APR DBI/DBD from Nick Kew is not yet into APR-Util.  I think
there
> was general agreement that this interface would be worth having, but
> Nick is waiting to be granted karma for APR. PMC?

This is blocking on Cliff.

> 3. What is the status on the APR LDAP & Start TLS work?

Any 1.1.0 changes can't break the existing 1.0 LDAP API - my
understanding was
that these changes would do exactly that.  -- justin