From dev-return-24999-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Wed Aug 22 15:12:53 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AA18CD85E for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 15:12:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 65876 invoked by uid 500); 22 Aug 2012 15:12:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 65782 invoked by uid 500); 22 Aug 2012 15:12:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 65774 invoked by uid 99); 22 Aug 2012 15:12:52 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 15:12:52 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [74.125.82.178] (HELO mail-we0-f178.google.com) (74.125.82.178) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 15:12:44 +0000 Received: by weyu7 with SMTP id u7so783026wey.37 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 08:12:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index :content-language:x-gm-message-state; bh=Yr2LPHT2IaBP2rGz50c1zySzMhF1Fqsl0V0qwrNvg94=; b=Upns0L0fYlcYwUY+Nls45pEfhQPFcoDJUjIxrm3Zgc7m2H1U8Ti1DBJTirZwVmDdNw TudsDamf8LtXjj/scwE1LeW5XoDjCWySTQwhiIR8Ogh2ZKuD2YrnI3He8Nn9BEoisCPH eOum9LMJGBBN6RCUgB3FaESzjelQW7a3BhY6cZ6w7oDDQR0Aowjf+xkucWlxF41z6iY9 /TXLYyuUUKGZcJXkkKlTJUWPA0ysdkgaAMFi5Xh8P7DH523gLvCKxMjX7iLxYk5rSqpB N9J+wFZYRxu56XpmgpqUoB+6r2zyuXF6gnaSejNmd/HpK3M0xHSY951KXXY8NMNA1CEm xPqA== Received: by 10.180.106.137 with SMTP id gu9mr6602478wib.20.1345648342248; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 08:12:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from i72600 (ip92-186-173-82.adsl2.static.versatel.nl. [82.173.186.92]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l6sm39608296wiz.4.2012.08.22.08.12.21 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 22 Aug 2012 08:12:21 -0700 (PDT) From: "Bert Huijben" To: "'William A. Rowe Jr.'" , References: <201208062224.52416.sf@sfritsch.de> <5024E2A3.6070705@kippdata.de> <201208102205.00717.sf@sfritsch.de> <5027EA83.6000805@rowe-clan.net> In-Reply-To: <5027EA83.6000805@rowe-clan.net> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release apr-util 1.5.0 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 17:12:15 +0200 Message-ID: <000e01cd8078$83fb2e80$8bf18b80$@qqmail.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGmHqRWOtBLwr8a8bRv1EUEC8VTdQIiyGFCAa8E3U4B+xFNZpeGTEgQ Content-Language: nl X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnbOFVibGv/QtOHX3M+ZtIRUxrjhtAIlT37mJESDHWFG/zbYFjuF9ixOFaRbiLeD6UrUGFY X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > -----Original Message----- > From: William A. Rowe Jr. [mailto:wrowe@rowe-clan.net] > Sent: zondag 12 augustus 2012 19:40 > To: dev@apr.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apr-util 1.5.0 >=20 > On 8/10/2012 1:05 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > > Thanks for the detailed tests. > > > > On Friday 10 August 2012, Rainer Jung wrote: > >> If you don't need to release before, I would like to fix the LDADD > >> use over the weekend, but it is not a show stopper. > > > > It seems I will be busy in the next few days. It is unlikely that I > > T&R 1.5.1 before next Wednesday. > > > >> Another nice to have would be an expat update to 2.1.0. > > > > Has anyone looked into this before and knows how much work this is? >=20 > I have an alternate suggestion as of 1.5 - to drop our embedded expat > just as we did in trunk. Require the user to obtain the (now once > again maintained) expat package. >=20 > > Another nice to have fix would be support for newer Berkley DB > > versions (PR 53684). >=20 > And I'd also like to incorporate the rfc implementation of punycode > encode/decode for use by any i18n domain features of our consumers, > such as httpd or even client apps. Would anyone mind, if I can get > this into the tree by tuesday aftn? As 1.5.0 wasn't released, I don't > think the binary compatibility is an issue just yet. Ping? Any update on the punycode support? I'm not really part of the apr(-util) project, but I would like to see a = new release after the failed 1.4.2 attempt months ago. Bert