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: [VOTE] APR versioning rules w.r.t. released snapshots
Date Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:50:51 GMT
Jeff Trawick wrote:
> We disagree on whether or not the httpd 2.3.4 prereqs tarball
> constitutes an APR release.  Leave it at that.

Actually we don't disagree.  Its an ASF release and not an APR release,
and we all agree on that.  I suggest that it's trivial to work around
binary compatibility in *most* respects, e.g. DTRACE maintainer macros
excepted, and this becomes a silly-vote thread of the people who had
championed the release.

You asked, and I answered, that it's perfectly sane to offer some
snapshots as the reference of the perhaps-to-be-released API in our
/dev/dist/ area, etc.  This was before the ASF /dist/ release occured.
There were very trivial ways to satisfy my early objections rather than
steamroll over them.  And now we have specific applications where that
release now creates 'headaches' and disruption for the users of APR.

> It is not helpful in
> any way to refer to my vote as unethical or as a slight of hand.

It is simply contradictory and inconsistent.  I maintain voting to this
contraction is invalid.  But more importantly, I am looking forwards to
hearing the opinions of those who didn't already have this argument, as
they are the ones who had nothing to do with the anticipated state of the
user's machines.  Are they satisfied testing for and excluding 1.4.0-dev,
and having their app break if the user installs httpd-2.3.4?  None of the
folks who were part of this thread have that answer.

I am sorry if 'unethical' was an overly-harsh way of answering this vote.

Better yet, let my vetos stand and let me demonstrate that the workaround
is trivial, rather than pursuing such a thread, and disrupting APR development.
Where the workaround is not possible, I'm either going to concede that 1.5.0
resolves the ambiguity or we are living with the problem with proper cautions
to the users at apr.apache.org/httpd.apache.org.

View raw message