On 15.02.2013 17:55, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > I guess the other question is whether 2.2.24 should be tagged with the > original apr-util 1.3 family, or whether we should pick up 1.5.1? And > back to the older 2.2.23 sources, should it be the then-current apr-util > that was bundled in the .tar.gz distribution?
APR and APU are not part of the svn tag, are they? It looks like 2.2.23 was rolled with APR 1.4.6 and APU 1.4.1 in the tarballs, the current versions at that time. I'd say there's no reason not to proceed like that, ie. using 1.4.6/1.5.1 for 2.2.24 source tarballs and binaries. Regards, Rainer
