apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Querna <p...@querna.org>
Subject Re: Quick things, apr/apr-util releases
Date Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:03:40 GMT
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:50 AM, William A. Rowe Jr.
<wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Jeff Trawick wrote:
>> I thought that was covered by
>> "Paul and I agree that we shouldn't be working to accommodate a
>> *developer* who programs against an API that shipped by httpd labeled
>> '-alpha'.  It wasn't an apr-util release, they shouldn't have any such
>> expectations."
> Not quite; the scenario that follows is;
>  - user builds/installs apr-util-1.4.1 w/ crypto
>  - user builds/installs crypto-using application
>  - user builds/installs httpd-2.3.4-alpha, not replacing crypto modules
>   (not even realizing they are borking their 1.4.1 install).
> Maintaining consistency means that they won't crash when running the
> arbitrary app.  Breaking the structure means that it will randomly crash
> when attempting to use the crypto api calls.

No, the only known application in the universe using these APIs, from
a dev snapshot of APR is mod_session_crypto, an optional module for
httpd, disabled by default, and only distributed in httpd's alpha

An 'estimate' of 10,000 users is completely bogus Bil.

Like I said before, there aren't any users using this who aren't
probably subscribed to dev@httpd.  (And by users, I think there is
about a 50% chance they are also committers!)

>From the vote so far before you claim to have 'invalidated' it, there
is a clear consensus that httpd's bundling of a dev release of APR
would not trigger the ABI stability rules, but this fighting over an
unused module from an alpha release triggering ABI stability rules is
insane, and it severely demotivates me from being involved with the
APR project.


View raw message