On 09 Mar 2010, at 4:53 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
In theory, when people try apr v1.5 for the first time, we're likely
to find out. I suspect it may be worth assuming support is present,
and then if it turns out that a platform that is still used doesn't
support it, we can then reintroduce the ifdef (and ENOTIMPL).
-1 veto, please revert the backport.
If you are experimenting on users, can we please keep that activity to
trunk? Some of us here are committed to offering developers a stable
library of features they can count on. Thanks in advance.
You're vetoing a patch that I haven't even written yet??? Based on us
"experimenting" on a branch that hasn't been released yet???
What I was suggesting was to remove the #ifdef and make the assumption
that O_NONBLOCK is supported on all unix platforms on apr v1.5, and
fixing this assertion if it turns out to not be true *before*
releasing v1.5.0. If you believe this is too onerous on users that's
entirely fine, but then say so. There is no need to wave around a -1
in the air, I am perfectly happy to accept your objection without
being bashed over the head with a veto.
Regards,
Graham
--
