Hi Daniel,
we are already devleoping custom modules for 2.0,
ok.. sometimes we get a bit burnt and have to go and change
some function names when something gets pulled into the APR,
but in my experience the change is to a function name, the concept
stays the same, and is a low-risk change.
I sugest you grab the 2.0.19 release (when it gets pushed to BETA)
and use that as a baseline, subscribe to the CVS mailing list and
take a note when you see comments like 'changed function name' or 'moved to APR'
..Ian
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Padwa, Daniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 6:42 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: Apache 2.0 final ?
>
>
> > I think people like him are asking: when is the fiddling
> done, and people
> > have a program they can start to incorporate into their
> operating system
> > releases, deploy for production customers, etc? While
> we're still working
> > on low-level issues like pools/sms in APR and fixing other
> big performance
> > issues, we're not there yet.
>
> Another spin on the same question: when do the core
> developers (you know who
> you are) think that the internal APIs have stabilized enough
> so that effort
> expended porting home-grown modules won't need to be thrown
> away when 2.0
> settles down?
>
> Some of us (I don't have enough data to say "many") can't put
> the server
> through heavy burn-in without local modules, and can't
> justify porting those
> to a not-settled set of core APIs.
>
> Or did I miss the announcement that we had passed this point?
> It doesn't
> need to be an unbreakable promise, just some guidance.
>
