On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 05:22:22PM -0500, William Rowe wrote: > At 04:58 PM 4/15/2003, Joe Orton wrote: > >An APR "stable" branch will thus be needed which can be followed by the > >httpd-2.0 stable branch; this could be called APR_0_9_BRANCH and forked > >off the 0.9.3 tag. (future 0.9.x releases could be made from here too > >if anyone felt inclined to make them) > > Silly. > > What future 0.9.x branch are you suggesting, 0.9.3.1.5? > > APR 1.0 will be 1.0 - and yes - when we feel ready to 'take the plunge' > and enter into a permanant API contract for the lifespan of APR 1.0, then > by all means we split off APR_0_9_BRANCH and go. > > In the meantime; there should really be absolutely zero change other than > ripping the /* deprecated */ sections and flipping a couple of _ex() style > APIs > that were short term kludges. > > IOW, are we ready for 1.0? By my reading of STATUS, we aren't there yet.
That's the point I was trying to make - I think that whilst HEAD is constrained to being 0.9.2-compatible-ish, the changes required to make the API "1.0-worthy" can't be committed. Or they are committed but #if 0'ed out, so they don't get compiled, used or tested; to me a prerequisite for a "1.0-worthy" API would be that it has been compiled, used and tested for a reasonable period of time. I don't understand how APR will ever become 1.0-worthy if HEAD remains indefinitely constrained to being 0.9.2-compatible. joe
