apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Proposal: splitting APR and former apr-util libraries
Date Fri, 03 Jun 2011 05:05:22 GMT
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 07:51, Graham Leggett <minfrin@sharp.fm> wrote:
> If people are starting their own portability libraries, then it shows that
> apr is not fit for purpose in its current form, and that needs to be
> addressed by the apr project. I don't recall much discussion happening over
> "combined vs split", suddenly we were combined, and as I recall nobody
> provided an explanation as to what problem they were trying to solve by
> doing so.

I tried to bring up discussion about concentrating on just OS
portability and dropping all the other gunk a couple years ago. See
the thread titled "APR: Portable across Operating Systems, or
Libraries?" back in January 2009. It kinda devolved into just talking
about platforms.

The part about combining... I don't know where exactly that came from.
I remember some discussion, but I was already thinking the
functionality should be dropped (whether merged or not).

> It seems what we're working towards is combining apr and apr-util, removing
> most of the stuff that was in apr-util, ending up pretty much back with apr,
> which leads me to ask why we ever bothered combining the two in the first
> place.

Dunno. Go do the research in the svn logs. Somebody did the commit.
Look for the discussion around then, or ask that committer.

I've never supported it, so I just stopped worrying about it since the
community seemed supportive of that direction... *shrug*


View raw message