Compat for 0.9.4 sure, but we should drop the compat for 1.0. apr_brigade_t seems fine to me, so +1
david > William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > >Dumb Q perhaps; for APR-UTIL 1.0 don't we want to change: > > > >typedef struct apr_bucket apr_bucket; > >typedef struct apr_bucket_brigade apr_bucket_brigade_t; > >etc > > > >to follow our convention: > > > >typedef struct apr_bucket_t apr_bucket_t; > >typedef struct apr_bucket_brigade_t apr_bucket_brigade_t; > >etc... > > > > > > +1 as long as we maintain (deprecated) typedefs > for the old names for backward compatibility. > > Brian > > >
