Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of chip@force-elite.com
 designates 72.232.80.58 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <495EC0B6.1040505@force-elite.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:34:46 -0800
From: Paul Querna <chip@force-elite.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
CC: APR Developer List <dev@apr.apache.org>
Subject: Re: On to APR 2.0.0?  Beyond 9x/ME
References: <495EA9EE.2090009@rowe-clan.net>
In-Reply-To: <495EA9EE.2090009@rowe-clan.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> I don't know that we have any active interest in 2.0.0 at this moment,
> but I'd like to treat trunk as such from this point on, and begin to
> break all of the legacy code so we can focus on strictly the modern
> code.  In my case, that means untangling all legacy 9x/ME support and
> only supporting modern NT based kernels.  NT4 SP6 and 2000 wouldn't
> be broken deliberately, although if we run across a real hard case it's
> worth reconsidering that decision, too.
> 
> So ... if we are OK with starting a cleanup phase on the dawn of this
> new year, I'd like to go ahead and start dropping deprecated interfaces,
> cleaning up _ex() extentions, etc, and reviewing naming and calling
> conventions that defy our standards.
> 
> Comments?  Anyone real eager for a 1.4.0 branch, or can we start moving
> ahead and continue to touch up 1.3.x as necessary in the meantime?

Are there any APIs currently in trunk but not in 1.3.x?

If so, I'd suggest branching trunk to 1.x, incase we end up doing a 
1.4.x, and then you can continue on trunk.....

-Paul