On 21 Jan 2010, at 8:11 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
You are absolutely right, I made this comment on d...@httpd
yesterday, that
too many bad API examples are in the library today.
This suggests that dbd was not given adequate oversight coming into
apr.
That shouldn't suggest that less oversight now applies.
Folks using dbd will be rudely interrupted in apr-2.0 with the need to
modify their code for conforming api names and arguments. I don't
want
that to happen to users of apr_crypto_*, if it can be avoided.
There are still several flaws with the crypto API on trunk, I'm
looking
forward to fixing these as part of a general review, not singling out
crypto. If we can wait a month to release 1.5.0 with crypto, then
they
will have no 'interruption' in their use of that API; it will take me
some time to complete this entire review and present the conclusions
to
this list.
Waiting is entirely reasonable, as there is definite merit in ensuring
v1.x is done as right as humanly possible.
Regards,
Graham
--
