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: svn commit: r1128885 - in /apr/apr/trunk: build/apu-conf.m4 build/apu-ldap.m4 configure.in
Date Tue, 31 May 2011 18:48:05 GMT
On 5/31/2011 1:13 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> We have already agreed that any LDAP abstraction library needs to encapsulate the whole
> API like apr_dbd does, and that each LDAP implementation needs to be a discrete provider,
> just like apr_dbd does. And now you're telling us that no proposal has ever been discussed
> in the last six years?

Of course it has been discussed, discussed, and discussed again, and experienced
a complete failure to launch.

Rowe, Trawick, Erenkrantz and Orton voted to drop apr_ldap and give it
over to httpd to maintain if they want it 12 1/2 months ago.  Whether
httpd does or does not want it is really a topic for that dev list.


> And why the sudden urgency? Is there an APR v2.0 release imminent that you plan but
> haven't discussed with the list? And is this proposed release of APR v2.0 so important
> that others must stop what they're doing on httpd v2.4, followed by apr-util v1.4, to
> on apr v2.0 suddenly out of the blue?

The interest in 'doing something someday' blocks APR v2.0 release,
and blocking releases by inaction is always unacceptable at the ASF.
It is the equivilant of leaving trunk in a not-compiling state (which
I did only momentarily).

We now have something to review for apr_crypto, thanks to your efforts,
along with choice between libxml2 and expat, and my last project is to
work out untangling apr 2.x from apr-iconv, which is one more unmaintained
code base to deprecate.

Nobody needs to stop anything on httpd v2.4, I am in the process of
hooking up apr-2 correctly for that build for win32.  Quick review on
unix indicates it works correctly.  But that would be a dev@httpd

View raw message