apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Vote] apr-util 1.5.x -> trunk
Date Thu, 07 Oct 2010 11:26:52 GMT
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 6:29 AM, Graham Leggett <minfrin@sharp.fm> wrote:
> On 07 Oct 2010, at 12:22 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
>> These choices seem skewed to me.  "apr is apr-util/trunk" is a
>> different concept than "rename 1.5.x to trunk."  Conceptually, "apr is
>> apr-util trunk" whatever we decide.
>
> I disagree, in the past, we had two projects, each with an independent trunk
> and release cycle, one called apr, the other called apr-util. We have chosen
> to retire the apr-util project, and have copied the functionality into apr,
> but that doesn't make the apr-util project go away.

Maybe we're disagreeing to agree ;)  All I (we) mean by "apr is
apr-util" trunk from a conceptual standpoint is that we expect new
features to the "util" part of the code will go to apr trunk first,
then potentially be backported to the apr-1.x-compatible "util"
codebase (which happens to be in a separate tree).

> We will still need to make releases on apr-util in the v1.x series, and we
> may need to bump v1.3 to v1.4, etc. For this, we need a properly functional
> trunk, otherwise those following the standard svn conventions face problems.

yep

Mime
View raw message