At 11:08 AM 11/22/2004, Cliff Woolley wrote: >On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > >> Yes - I understand that this means 1.x will never be used by >> httpd. Version numbers are cheap. The APR project should >> become used to this, if they are active, and httpd moves at >> it's normal pace, it would be easy to go through APR 2.x, 3.x, >> and land somewhere in version 4.x by the time httpd 2.4 or 3.0 >> walks out the door. > >Do you understand how ridiculous that sounds?
How so? Let's imagine the release -after- 2.2 takes another 12-18 months. Perhaps the event mpm gets plugged in, and it takes three months, alone, just to find all the gotchas of thread-jumping. In the meantime, apr is adopted by other projects. These coders offer up some solid functionality for their own applications, and the apr team agrees. Yes, I realize most of the time new functionality can be a minor bump of apr. Yes, I realize apr has not been all that active in the past 12 months. All I'm arguing is that apr shouldn't be addicted to some 1:1 correspondence of httpd and apr bumps. Bill