On Feb 24, 2005, at 1:52 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On Wednesday, February 23, 2005 10:37 PM -0600 "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Uhm, no. By that definition, all the pollution spewed from typical Linux libraries would be considered 'public api.' Other platforms are using the construct to extract public symbol lists now, IIUC.
APR_DECLARE (DAV_DECLARE, etc)is our shorthand of what has been publicizied and what is internal.
No, we never declared them, hence they weren't officially part of the API. The fact that Unix-based OSes technically throw everything into the API isn't part of our API contract.
I'm talking about gstein's intent. My understanding is that from day one, mod_dav was supposed to provide an API that allows anyone to write a back-end provider. In the process of writing mod_dav_svn, we discover that parts the provider API aren't accessible from win32. So the bug here is just sloppy execution of the original API idea. Things should have explicitly exported/declared from the beginning, and I guess it's just dumb luck that it's been working on Unix.
Note that I'm not saying that making the mod_dav API change isn't good, but I'm miffed at the claim that this is justification to -1 a release.
I don't think of it as "changing an API", but rather, "declaring an API correctly, one that has always existed." Should it hold up a 2.2 release? Oy, you're right, I guess not. It's not like there are thousands of users out there scrambling to write mod_dav back-ends. :-)
