wrowe 2002/07/12 15:26:59
Modified: . STATUS
Log:
Thanks brian... add my vote, and move fielding's to make it absolutely
clear this is a seperate alternative.
Revision Changes Path
1.161 +5 -4 apr/STATUS
Index: STATUS
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/apr/STATUS,v
retrieving revision 1.160
retrieving revision 1.161
diff -u -r1.160 -r1.161
--- STATUS 12 Jul 2002 22:10:38 -0000 1.160
+++ STATUS 12 Jul 2002 22:26:59 -0000 1.161
@@ -86,14 +86,15 @@
3) Renaming the function to get rid of apr_time_t vs time_t confusion,
and strongly identify the type as apr_busec_t or apr_butime_t, with
an ongoing contract with users about the type's units.
- +1: fielding [prefers apr_busec or simple time_t / struct tm]
+ +1: fielding [prefers apr_busec]
+0.5: wrowe, [prefers apr_time_busec_t and apr_span_busec_t]
brianp [can live with apr_time_busec_t and apr_span_busec_t]
-0: striker, jerenkrantz
-0.5: rbb, ianh, dreid
- 4) Using time_t and struct timeval
- -1: brianp
+ 4) Using time_t and struct timeval/tm
+ +1: fielding
+ -1: brianp, wrowe
[fielding: Is APR time guaranteed to be a scalar quantity? If so,
then we must include units as part of the definition of the
