> > > > > Huh? sdbm.h is exported by APRUTIL. It is a publically available > > > > > export. Or, > > > > > it should be at least. > > > > > > > > Then the header name at the very least needs to change. As it is now, > > > > if > > > > we install Apache on a machine that already has sdbm, we will break > > > > things > > > > horribly. > > > > > > Well, that's always been the case :-) > > > > > > Hmm. I don't think that I'd have a problem renaming SDBM entry points and > > > the header to apr_sdbm. I'll go put a line into the STATUS file for voting > > > input. > > > > This shouldn't require a vote. What we have now is broken, and we are in > > commit then review mode. > > Require? No... probably not. Considerate? Yes :-) > > For changes that revamp existing APIs, I prefer to ask. Not always, > unfortunately, but when I think about it, I like to. > > In this case, somebody may have an alternate opinion on what to do. For > example, Bill's initial suggestion was to simply hide SDBM altogether and > make people use apr_dbm_* to access it. I'd prefer to expose SDBM since we > have the darn thing, and then make apr_dbm separately available for people > that don't have a specific requirement on what DBM gets used.
I wasn't actually thinking of renaming the entry points right now. Right now, I just want to get the header file renamed, because it is invalid to install it as it is now. The entry point change can wait a few days, but if we are going to release an Apache alpha on Monday, the file name needs to change before we release the alpha. Ryan _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
