> Hmm, I wonder if we should do a T&R with APR to give a "release"
> that is separate from httpd-2.0. I don't see any reason why we
> couldn't do this. I just have no clue how to do the T&R. My
> understanding is that anyone with commit privs can do that.
> I'll look into it though.
>
> BUT, I think that the precedent with the APR-using projects is to
> require a source checkout. Subversion and httpd-2.0 both require
> the current CVS version of APR. This allows APR to not have to
> maintain backward compatibility with "previous" releases (not
> that we would anyway).
I think the only reason that works for httpd-2.0 and subversion is that
they are heavily involved in APR development. We can't very well expect
every project to be in that same boat. I like your first suggestion much
better (tag-and-roll to get [semi]stable versions of APR pushed out, then
projects that have problems can submit patches, etc...)
> > >And, I guess, my point is that we should start that transition now.
> > >Start to write a mod_jk that is built around APR. By the time
> > >that is done, Apache 2.0 may even be release candidate. Or not.
> >
> > What about working an APR wrapper ? ie something which wrap OS calls
> > to APR or native calls ? And make mod_jk call wrapper functions ?
>
> I think that defeats the purpose of APR. If APR isn't doing it right,
> then APR needs to be fixed. APR should definitely support any platforms
> that you are concerned about (i.e. Win32, etc.). Which, of course,
> means that httpd-2.0 will run on those platforms as well.
>
> The idea is that APR would better support these platforms than rewriting
> the same code in mod_jk. And, ideally, if you build around APR, you
> will simplify the build process because APR will figure out all the OS
> trickiness for you.
I completely agree. We don't want a wrapper to a wrapper, yuck! If APR
isn't portable, then it's broken.
> > But even APR will only cover OS calls, and didn't solve the problems of
> > linking with web-server differents from Apache (IIS/iPlanet/Domino...)
>
> Correct, but the core jk components could still be built around APR.
> And, I imagine that the problem of other webservers has to do more with
> their specific OS than the web server (i.e. linking in APR).
>
> And, hopefully, I'll have time at some point to actually back up what I
> am saying with code. I've just got a bazillion other things on my plate
> right now. =) -- justin aka "APR evangelist"
-aaron
