perl-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <>
Subject Re: 2.0.0 version tweaks
Date Mon, 16 May 2005 22:08:37 GMT
Geoffrey Young <> writes:

> Joe Schaefer wrote:
>> Stas Bekman <> writes:
>>>How people are going to distinguish between mp2.0 and mp2.2 other
>>>than using $VERSION? If you are introducing extra APIs for versioning at
>>>least get it right.
>> Ok, lets do that.  But first we need to agree on what "right" is.
> didn't we have this discussion already?  IIRC my initial implementation
> had major/minor and after discussion we decided against it.

But I think Stas wants to take a stronger stance on what the
minor number conveys to users.  I think he wants to say that 2.0.x 
releases are guaranteed to be fully compatible with 2.0.y releases,
where x < y.  If you want to do that, I think there's a potential
problem with trying to support both versions of httpd within a 
single mp2 release, because the behavior of some of their C APIs 
will have changed.  The reason I think Stas wants it this way
is that he's also arguing that the mp2.0 API is fixed in stone 
once 2.0.0 is released.  Hence all subsequent API changes, even 
those inherited from httpd, must be incorporated into mp2.2.

I guess it depends on what you think mp2 is all about.  To me
it's about exposing the server's guts, and from that perspective
the mp2 version numbers are only concerned with the XS glue.  So I 
don't mind if the behavior changes depending on which webserver
I compile mp2 against.  But for someone with a less lax attitude,
such changes might break the minor-versioning rules for mp2, unless 
both behaviors are fully documented by mp2.  Personally I think
this is asking too much of the mp2 team, and would prefer the
whole minor numbering scheme replaced with something simpler
like what apreq2 does with its package numbering.

Joe Schaefer

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message