Re: svn commit: r106663 - /apr/apr/trunk/CHANGES /apr/apr/trunk/include/apr_file_io.h
At 03:26 PM 11/26/2004, you wrote: Author: stas Date: Fri Nov 26 13:26:37 2004 New Revision: 106663 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=revrev=106663 Log: rename the fopen defines (APR_READ, APR_WRITE, etc.) to have prefix APR_FOPEN_ (keeping the old defines) Stas, you forgot doxygen @deprecate tags! For example, with; +#define APR_FOPEN_READ 0x1 /** Open the file for reading */ we need a matching doxygen entry redirecting the user; +#define APR_READ APR_FOPEN_READ /** @deprecated @see APR_FOPEN_READ */ This provides documentation that devs *need* to track the changes. Bill
Re: svn commit: r106663 - /apr/apr/trunk/CHANGES /apr/apr/trunk/include/apr_file_io.h
At 10:50 AM 11/29/2004, Stas Bekman wrote: Also should the deprecated macros stay in this file or can those be moved to some dedicated file to reduce the noise? They stay in place. During the next major+1 bump, the RM trawls through the files looking for @deprecated, and simply strips them out. The way doxygen works, you would not want these moving out of scope to another file. Bill
Re: svn commit: r106663 - /apr/apr/trunk/CHANGES /apr/apr/trunk/include/apr_file_io.h
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: At 10:50 AM 11/29/2004, Stas Bekman wrote: Also should the deprecated macros stay in this file or can those be moved to some dedicated file to reduce the noise? They stay in place. During the next major+1 bump, the RM trawls through the files looking for @deprecated, and simply strips them out. That's not possible with this particular change, since everything (APR/httpd) still uses the old macros. The way doxygen works, you would not want these moving out of scope to another file. Is there a way to put them in a different file and tell doxygen that the following entries really belong to a different file? -- __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: svn commit: r106663 - /apr/apr/trunk/CHANGES /apr/apr/trunk/include/apr_file_io.h
At 11:45 AM 11/29/2004, Stas Bekman wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: At 10:50 AM 11/29/2004, Stas Bekman wrote: Also should the deprecated macros stay in this file or can those be moved to some dedicated file to reduce the noise? They stay in place. During the next major+1 bump, the RM trawls through the files looking for @deprecated, and simply strips them out. That's not possible with this particular change, since everything (APR/httpd) still uses the old macros. No, it's a requirement when we push major+1. Then again, httpd may stay with 1.x, or may have a prerequisite 1.1 (meaning we assume your change is there) or it may even move to 2.x - in which case we -must- update all occurrences within httpd. There is no reason to keep using the old symbols in apr[-util/-iconv] so feel free to start migrating those. The way doxygen works, you would not want these moving out of scope to another file. Is there a way to put them in a different file and tell doxygen that the following entries really belong to a different file? 1. it isn't pretty and 2. you can't force a user to include another file from minor to minor bump. Their code should keep compiling w/o changes. Please don't worry that this seems 'polluted' - the next major bump cleans this all out. In the meantime, if they look for these symbols grep APR_FOO include/* they should find the old and new flavors in the same file, helping them with their own migration tasks. Bill
Re: svn commit: r106663 - /apr/apr/trunk/CHANGES /apr/apr/trunk/include/apr_file_io.h
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: At 11:45 AM 11/29/2004, Stas Bekman wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: At 10:50 AM 11/29/2004, Stas Bekman wrote: Also should the deprecated macros stay in this file or can those be moved to some dedicated file to reduce the noise? They stay in place. During the next major+1 bump, the RM trawls through the files looking for @deprecated, and simply strips them out. That's not possible with this particular change, since everything (APR/httpd) still uses the old macros. No, it's a requirement when we push major+1. Then again, httpd may stay with 1.x, or may have a prerequisite 1.1 (meaning we assume your change is there) or it may even So when will it be possible to know whether it'll be in or not? If someone decides to remove those later, why do I waste my time? move to 2.x - in which case we -must- update all occurrences within httpd. Understood. There is no reason to keep using the old symbols in apr[-util/-iconv] so feel free to start migrating those. I'll be working on symbols that I touch, at the moment I don't have to time to work on other things. Once mod_perl 2.0 is out I may be able to spend more time on other things. The way doxygen works, you would not want these moving out of scope to another file. Is there a way to put them in a different file and tell doxygen that the following entries really belong to a different file? 1. it isn't pretty and 2. you can't force a user to include another file from minor to minor bump. Their code should keep compiling w/o changes. Please don't worry that this seems 'polluted' - the next major bump cleans this all out. In the meantime, if they look for these symbols grep APR_FOO include/* they should find the old and new flavors in the same file, helping them with their own migration tasks. Good point. -- __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
