httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: Renaming: READY?
Date Fri, 10 Apr 1998 13:43:31 GMT
Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> 
> The only consensus was to do the renaming the half-way, i.e. only do it to
> solve the namespace conflict. The what-is-API-and-what-is-not-API conflict
> definitely cannot be solved _at this time_, at least not non-technically. So,
> in the interest of the user we at least solve the namespace conflict by
> renaming the identifiers in the source to use the general ap_ prefix now and
> keep the other debate for a later time. 

Let's handle the namespace stuff, and prefix it (all) with ap_

We'll leave tomorrow for tomorrow :)

> 
> My only concern now is that I really hope not to be tagged as the "bad guy"
> just because _I_ apply the renaming patch :-(. I personally was happy with
> HIDE stuff but that's no more of interest. So, I take over the unthankful job
> and apply the renaming. I've already prepared the stuff and tested it three
> times and it worked fine.

Ralf, if anyone comes after you, tell 'em "see Jim." I'm
serious.

> 
> Hmmm.... an unthankful job, a very very unthankful job... :-(
> 

Well, I for one am very thankful... hopefully you saw the one post
where I said that I thought your efforts were great, and that
I'm sorry that that seemed to have gotten lost in the debate.
I think Martin +1'ed it as well. Look at it this way, it's the
details that caused the controversy... there was never in debate
in the actual mechanical implementation. :) :)

-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   |||   jim@jaguNET.com   |||   http://www.jaguNET.com/
            "That's no ordinary rabbit... that's the most foul,
            cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever laid eyes on"

Mime
View raw message