On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 10:42:09AM +0100, Sander Striker wrote: > Thought this might be something for you... > > [08:56] <wrowe> hey folks, dav_new_error question for the svn'ers > [08:57] <wrowe> anyone noticed the int save_errno = errno; bogosity within >dav_new_error? > [08:57] <wrowe> and has anyone suggested a good way to grab apr_status_t values into >that dav_error rec?
It was a shortcut to avoid having to pass the darned thing to every call of dav_new_error. The "right" answer is to add an apr_status_t to the param list of dav_new_error. Note, though, that adding a param to that function is technically an MMN bump. However, there are only four Apache 2.0 mod_dav backends that I know about (mod_dav_fs, mod_dav_svn, mod_dav_repos (Catacomb), and mod_dav_psql). We can easily keep those up to date. It would be nice to have a finer-grained MMN. In particular, one just for the DAV API. I've also been thinking that Justin's new ap_provider stuff should take an ABI version number in there somewhere. A provider can register an API with a particular ABI version. A user can ask for providers that match a specific ABI. Or, (better) a user gets a provider and its ABI. The user can then adjust its processing based on whatever ABI the provider was designed for. Doing that to ap_provider would allow us to upgrade the provider-based APIs without an MMN bump. With sufficient work, the user of a provider could call the provider in N different ways, based on different incarnations of the binary interface. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
