Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 27138 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2008 11:05:12 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 14 Apr 2008 11:05:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 57518 invoked by uid 500); 14 Apr 2008 11:05:12 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 57461 invoked by uid 500); 14 Apr 2008 11:05:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 57450 invoked by uid 99); 14 Apr 2008 11:05:12 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 04:05:12 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.202.165.29] (HELO smtpauth17.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net) (64.202.165.29) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 11:04:21 +0000 Received: (qmail 18664 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2008 11:04:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (89.21.226.162) by smtpauth17.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.29) with ESMTP; 14 Apr 2008 11:04:37 -0000 Message-ID: <48033A44.8080804@rowe-clan.net> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:04:36 +0100 From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: Rolling APR[-util] 1.3.0 References: <47FF7892.3060605@rowe-clan.net> <20080414094237.GA4498@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20080414094237.GA4498@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Joe Orton wrote: > > at least some of these problems will at require API changes to fix, so > it seems dumb to ship as-is. so -- you are suggesting deferring these into 1.4.0? > I would (again) suggest moving this stuff out onto a branch so those > interested in making it work can do so without getting in the way of > releases. i've made it so; branches/1.3.x now exist for each of apr and apr-util.