On 5/8/06, Mladen Turk <mturk@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What do you guys think of this email subject?
> IMHO it would make an additional requirement
> for the unix builds of httpd, but windows is
> dependent on it anyhow.
>
> OTOH, the xlate would go to it's proper place,
> because it is a part of apr-iconv.
>
> The reason is simple. If someone needs xlate
> stuff, then he will use apr-iconv. The apr-util
> will in that case become really apr only dependant,
> which is not the case right now.
> Since apr-iconv is dependent on apr and apr-util,
> while (now) apr-util is dependent on apr-iconv
> (only on windows) this makes sense thought.

I think that's a horrible idea.  There are many operating systems
where you don't need apr-iconv in order to get apr_xlate to work, I
see zero benefit to making them download and build apr-iconv in order
to use the apr_xlate APIs.

-garrett