Joe Orton wrote:
....
> So far as I understand how all this discussion is relevant to the
> decision at hand ("what goes in apr-util") I agree with Ian.
>
> I think that apr-util should continue to be an "everything plus the
> kitchen sink" repository for APR-based code which:
>
> a) the committers of this project think is generally useful, and
> b) meets the expected standards of code quality, and
> c) is relatively small in magnitude (i.e. I'd be worried about
> dumping in tens of thousands of lines of new code)
+1, those are exactly my feelings.
-Paul
