apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: apr_threadpool bogosity?
Date Fri, 02 May 2008 18:36:44 GMT
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42889
> 
> which must be committed?
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20540
> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20542
> 
> I'm a little disturbed that the 1.3.0 discussion has been going on for
> about 2.5 weeks, and I just now noticed this flaw.  Once 1.3 is gone
> we can't *fix* the api, and can't expand it until 1.4

More on the topic;

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43876

containing threadpool API patches here;

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21378

without any closing feedback to Joe Mudd, submitter.

The httpd project has a goal to tag on the 7th.  Work backwards, that's
a tag here no later than the 4th.  I would hate to pull apr_threadpool,
but if it can't be addressed today or tomorrow and some final decisions
made on it's initial rollout, I'm tempted that we simply push it to 1.4.0,
which would be a shame.

Bill

Mime
View raw message