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 Wed, 01 Jun 2011 23:19:38 GMT
On 6/1/2011 5:37 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> I see a vote, and no on-list discussion that preceded it. Not only that, I see a vote
> the dev@apr list proposing an as yet unheard of solution that concerns a completely
> separate project, with no discussion having happened on either project. This is not how
> project at the ASF works.

Quit whining, of course this is how an ASF project works; there was a discussion,
it ate up a good part of the list bandwidth, with discussion and suggestions of
how to fix, and no fix forthcoming, and a conclusive decision on list;


Justin had brought this to the list from a f2f hackathon for a decision as this
blocked 2.0 in 2009(!).

You alone voted + offered to fix; bnichnoles, trawick and bojan supported
a fix if one was offered.

jerenkrantz, pquerna, wrowe, mturk, issac, and jorton voted to remove from apr.

This is decided not only by vote, but by inaction since 2009.  (No, 2009 was
not the first discussion on list, either.  It was the conclusive discussion.)

You suggested;

> I don't see any problem with completely wrapping the LDAP API. It will
> solve the single-LDAP-toolkit problem above.

but nobody is doing it, nobody has done it.

You suggested;

> - When I get a chance to set aside some time to sort out the LDAP
> abstraction, I don't want to find people saying afterwards "oh, but I
> thought we weren't doing LDAP any more"

but you had years to set aside time, and couldn't be bothered.  (In the
interim, I had to set aside time to make the merge to mod_ldap - that is
how the ASF works, [s]he who does the work makes the decisions.)

You asked;

> Can we move everything else, and
> leave apr-ldap in a legacy branch until someone has the time to get this
> done right for apr-2.0?

and it is so ( apr/apr-util/branches/1.4.x/ ).

View raw message