On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:08 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Jeff Trawick wrote:CORE_PRIVATE may be broken from release to release, it's a necessary
> Does somebody else care to share their opinion on this? Which of these
> are okay?
> - existing mod_perl releases (and potentially other third-party modules)
> won't compile with 2.2.12
concession to prevent utter stagnation :(
The bits are not CORE_PRIVATE.
You can find sample Perl code on the web that even tests these bits, though it isn't clear to me if that is a normal practice when using the Perl/mod_include interface.
I believe it was a mistake that this particular symbol/this particular
directive is not a part of the mod_includes internals :(
Perhaps, though mod_include does have a plug-in interface and we have this non-internal-detail-sounding function called ap_allow_options(). The include option variants could be interesting to such a plug-in.
So given we have a .23 mmn bump, perhaps document this in that section.
But the actual behavior of this flag changes significantly and I can't
see how to properly maintain mod_perl, deep internal compatibility.