At 12:43 PM -0700 8/27/02, Greg Stein wrote: > >> > APR is whatever we want it to be. If we start building things on > >You bet!
Well, it depends on how far you want to take the statement "whatever we want it to be" :) *duck* > > > top of APR that are functionally distinct from other projects under >> > the ASF, then I believe it makes sense to keep them as subprojects >> > of APR. Either we extend the meaning of APR to mean "any portable >> > libraries" or we take away the "server" in "HTTP Server Project". > >Per the Board, we are *already* about portable libraries. > APR has evolved... Not only is the project about a portable runtime library, but also generic portable libraries as well. I also find this a Good Thing. Growth is good. But it isn't, and shouldn't be, a drop-box for every library or suite of routines that comes down the path (not that anyone is saying that it is or will be). Regarding specifically e-k, as a html parser, it's got more a family tie, IMO, to the HTTP server project, than APR. I think it fits in better among libapreq than in the APR world, mostly because it's focused towards the web server and web server functionality. Would it destroy APR to fold e-k into it... I don't think so. Is there a better place under the ASF than in APR? Maybe :) -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
