Nathan Hartman wrote on Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:13 +00:00: > Daniel, thanks for testing this and documenting how. Please, could > you add that as a comment in the issue tracker? Or, if you'd like, > I'll be happy to do that and attribute it to you.
Go ahead. > I agree that this issue should be closed. > > From my reading, it looks like it was not closed as a reminder to move > this to APR. (Though that might make sense from a refactoring > standpoint, I think it would cause dependency headaches.) It's not that bad; we've done it before. We create an svn__foo() function, implement it, ask APR to add it too, then we use #if APR_VERSION_AT_LEAST() to have svn__foo() use the APR implementation in preference to ours, and remove the conditional and our implementation when we bump the minimum supported APR version.
