Ok, you have me confused :) There can be no binary breakage between 1.0.0 and 1.99.999. Nothing (except for unreleased changes in our svn repository) as we move forward.
Minor bumps introduce new features. Subversion bumps fix bugs. That's the short story. I'm increasing concerned that folks believe that we won't go to 1.1 or 2.0 until there is some magic 'httpd' project release. Nothing is farther from the truth. APR and APR-UTIL will be released as we have improvements that are stable. If the httpd, svn, foo, bash or bang projects want to use a specific version that is fine. Moving forward, httpd may decide to 'officially' move from version 1.1 to 1.3, for example, between their 2.2.0 and 2.2.4 releases. That's allowed by both project's compatibility rules. Nothing is changing that breaks code compiled for apr 1.1 or httpd 2.2.0 when a user moves up to 1.3 and 2.2.4. Where projects with strong binary bindings get trapped, is when they want to jump from APR 1.x to 2.x (or straight to 3.x skipping our 2.x releases.) We've assured our users that APR won't break compatibility until they jump major version. So the httpd project will prod us to continue to bug fix both apr 0.x, and apr 1.x, once they have released some httpd that is based on 1.x (if they do.) That's understandable. But asking about backporting from 1.1.x to 1.0.x seems somewhat silly. Bill At 12:29 PM 12/15/2004, Cliff Woolley wrote: >On Wed, 15 Dec 2004, Brad Nicholes wrote: > >> release of APR 1.0. Since then there has been a lot of activity in >> TRUNK as compared to almost no activity in the 1.0.x branch. > >After the 1.0.x branch was created at ApacheCon, Justin and Thom >backported everything that they thought could be backported without >breaking binary compatibility... > >--Cliff
