On Friday, February 23, 2001, at 12:05 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
<snip>
What are the advantages to maintaining two libraries doing the same thing
with slightly different APIs? Portable run-times are a lot of work, NSPR is
68KB times the number of platforms it works on. Supporting a portable
run-times is a permanent time sink, every time a new OS version is released
the PR has to be tweaked. I'm sure a new round of tweaking will be needed
for Windows XP.
Are there technical objections to NSPR from the Apache side?
If Apache will come on to the NSPR bandwagon my next target will be Xerces/Xalan. They're building yet another portable run-time.
I think that the main reasons for the resistance you are seeing are:
- apr is well along the development path
- switching Apache 2.0 from apr to NSPR would set Apache back at least 6 months, and it's already behind schedule. (As Greg pointed out).
I think that those 2 reasons far outweigh any technical objections that people might have.
-Fitz
