Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 25607 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2009 15:07:44 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Jan 2009 15:07:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 47975 invoked by uid 500); 23 Jan 2009 15:07:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 47935 invoked by uid 500); 23 Jan 2009 15:07:34 -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 47912 invoked by uid 99); 23 Jan 2009 15:07:34 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 07:07:34 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.202.165.37] (HELO smtpauth13.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net) (64.202.165.37) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:07:26 +0000 Received: (qmail 6798 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2009 15:07:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (76.252.112.72) by smtpauth13.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.37) with ESMTP; 23 Jan 2009 15:07:01 -0000 Message-ID: <4979DD14.2010602@rowe-clan.net> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 09:07:00 -0600 From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: APR Developer List CC: Ryan Bloom Subject: Re: APR: Portable across Operating Systems, or Libraries? References: <6cca3db30901230238yd684867p20a980488bc527cf@mail.gmail.com> <4979A970.6090306@sharp.fm> <1f1d9820901230424v743e9325t357d419cc933055@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1f1d9820901230424v743e9325t357d419cc933055@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Ryan Bloom wrote: > Why do you want to jettison "edge platforms"? The original goal was to > keep HTTPd as portable as 1.3 was, which meant APR had to support > mainframes, OS/2, etc. All of those edge platforms are what made APR > challenging to create and maintain, but they also provide a lot of value > for the people who want their code to work on mainframes, but don't want > to write their own portability library. > > Removing this support takes away a web server (at the very least) from > openBeOS, OS400, OS/2, etc. While these platforms may not be mainstream > these days, dropping support for them from HTTPd (the natural result of > dropping support from APR) seems like a decision that can only be made > after discussion with APR's users, not the developers of APR itself. I pulled support win 95/98/ME support from httpd because the operating system is abandoned. We should drop 'fringe' OS's that are no longer maintained by anyone. Those uses can certainly still use existing apps developed long ago for apr, and 0.9/1.x would still get critical security or bug fixes, but moving forwards nobody wants the complaints on those platforms which can't be resolved when platform issues occur, eh? Is BeOS gone? Is OS/2 gone yet? Netware is effectively gone, AIUI, as it's a maintenance-only phase out cycle.