At 06:41 PM 7/1/2004, Branko Čibej wrote: >Thoughts? I think 1.0 is an auspicious time to make this change, especially if >we declare apr-iconv to be an implementation detail of apr_xlate.
The nifty bit is, if we declare apr-iconv to be an internal, implementation detail of apr_xlate - we are free to adopt your suggestions in 1.0.1 :) What is troubling us most, at this instant, are those things that change the API in such a way that developer's code would be broken fixing the problems of APR 1.0.0. As long as they are internal details (default pathing, etc) then we won't be troubled by getting it right a little later. Bill
