William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
We've actually discussed this on list for several years, and your comments for years have been 'yea, that's on me, I aught to fix that'. Now that some folks would like to move forwards towards completing APR 2.0, there will be more of these sorts of votes.
A far more pragmatic approach to this problem is this:"We want to combine apr and apr-util into apr-2.0, but we don't want to go to the effort of moving across apr-ldap, because there are moves afoot to have this abstraction redone. Can we move everything else, and leave apr-ldap in a legacy branch until someone has the time to get this done right for apr-2.0?".
Calling for a vote saying that APR will stop supporting LDAP entirely is not a pragmatic approach to this problem.
Regards, Graham --
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
