> On Jun 6, 2019, at 5:04 AM, Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm> wrote:
>
> On 06 Jun 2019, at 07:07, Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> IMO, all that third party library wrappers should not be part of
>> apr. Anything from apr-util can go to apr (as it should in the first place),
>> but all those dbm, db, odbc, ldap or whatever providers should go as
>> separate apr projects.
>>
>> Basically for 2.0 we should have
>> apr/apr (the real stuff)
>> apr/apr-my-fancy-dbm-module1
>> apr/apr-my-fancy-dbm-module2
>> apr/apr-my-fancy-crypto-library
>> apr/apr-iconv :D
>
> +1.
>
> We have a basic underlying library that underpins everything, and then on top
> of that “libraries that use the underlying library, that provide abstraction
> services above”.
>
> The problem of abstracting away platforms should be an ecosystem of libraries
> under the APR project umbrella, not one monolithic library.
>
+1 as well.
