Message-ID: <34A10E68.EB47727C@Golux.Com>
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 1997 08:30:16 -0500
From: Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.Coar@Golux.Com>
Organization: The Apache Group
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: ap_ routines
References: <199712232026.PAA23437@devsys.jaguNET.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

This reminds me..  We're nominally futzing with the API,
particularly in changing the behaviour of ap_snprintf()
(never mind that the change is to correct naughty behaviour),
so isn't it about time to ++ MMN?

It also occurs to me that since we bump MMN when introducing
a potential API incompatibility with That Which Has Gone Before,
anyone who has to rebuild its modules as a result should be
able to easily find out what required the bump so it can ensure
that the modules aren't counting on the now-defunct behaviour.
For instance, maybe there's a module out there that depends
on the 0-length meaning sprintf() behaviour.  I don't think
ferreting this out of CHANGES is necessarily the simplest task
in the world; perhaps we should provide a file in the tree
with a short (but meaningful) blurb for each bump?

#ken	P-)}