httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Orton <>
Subject MMN and branches (was Re: svn commit: r307031)
Date Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:26:22 GMT
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 04:51:51PM -0500, William Rowe wrote:
> Joe Orton wrote:
> >I'd suggest just incrementing the MMN by one rather than bumping it by 
> >date on the branch unless and until the API is the same as the trunk.
> I previously considered that.  Although you are right; they are out of 
> sync, I think it's inevitable with two branches following different
> history, no?

It's not inevitable but it is the status quo ;)

> This is why the MODULE_MAGIC_COOKIE is now AP24 on svn head, because the
> two branches can't remain binary compatible, at least not except for
> some very short periods of time.
> Perhaps you are right, perhaps it's time to drop date stamps as the 

Maintaining an MMN which is intended to reflect every single ABI change 
and multiple branches with independent ABIs is going to be a tricky 

Alternatives I can see:

a) partition the MMN major by MODULE_MAGIC_COOKIE, so modules
target a particular API

 -> results are then reliable across history and across branches
 -> icky

b) stop bumping the MMN by date on branches, just increment by one and 
hope that enough gap is left

 -> results are then reliable across branches but not across history

c) don't backport ABI changes to branches; a branch much fork from a 
specific MODULE_MAGIC_NUMBER_MAJOR and must be rebased entirely to move 
to a new major

 -> avoids the problem entirely

d) drop the requirement that the MMN must reflect every single ABI 
change and make some more fundamental change


View raw message