apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Branko ─îibej <br...@xbc.nu>
Subject Re: [VOTE] APR versioning rules w.r.t. released snapshots
Date Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:08:17 GMT
Paul Querna wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:05 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
> <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>   
>> Branko ─îibej wrote:
>>     
>>> William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Unfortunately the APR versioning rules do not tell the developer not to compile
>>>> against or link to -dev, while this gives the user no indication of what
they
>>>> are doing to their APR installation.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> in that, you're correct. One would expect that developers do assume
>>> that, but it needs to be documented. Why not add that bit to
>>> versioning.html? It's quite a reasonable addition.
>>>
>>> For example, Subversion, which uses the exact same versioning rules as
>>> APR, regularly ships rlease candidates marked "-rc" and no-one worries
>>> about breaking the ABI to fix a bug between an RC and a release.
>>>       
>> Should apr_initialize and friends be programmed to go 'bang' and drop out
>> with a stderr emit, if compiled against a x.y.0-dev release and run against
>> x.y.*[1-9]?  Or, at least a stderr warning at initialization time?
>>
>> Seems like a simple, sensible fix.
>>
>>     
>
>
> No, APR is a library, it has no ownership over stderr/stdout.
>   

OK, stderr isn't a good idea, but APR can abort, right.

-- Brane


Mime
View raw message