Let's keep :)
> On Oct 16, 2017, at 11:54 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
> Seems Jim is +0 to back out and I'm +0 to keep. First
> strong opinion wins so we can get to tagging :)
>
> Absolute consensus on informing our apr, and httpd
> builders what not to pass as CFLAGS, and why.
>
>
> On Oct 16, 2017 13:58, "William A Rowe Jr" <wr...@rowe-clan.net
> <mailto:wr...@rowe-clan.net>> wrote:
> If the patch has merit on it's own, without being generalized, then I'm fine
> with tagging 1.6.1 with the OS/X specific backport included.
>
> Note that the proposed httpd fix is still uneasy about the trunk flavor;
> https://ci.apache.org/builders/httpd-trunk/builds/1202
> <https://ci.apache.org/builders/httpd-trunk/builds/1202>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com
> <mailto:j...@jagunet.com>> wrote:
> > The APR fix just handles macOS w/ Xcode9 or clang 5.0.0.
> > -Werror can be set "externally" and whether or not we should
> > actually die is debatable. But considering that AC_CHECK_LIB
> > will never use function prototypes, the long term solution may be
> > to simply never use that.
> >
> > I'm +0 on removing the check for APRs but we need to
> > document this behavior someplace since it can easily cause
> > unrepeatable builds.
