I use APU-1.4 exclusively and so far have not had any issues with it doing what I expect or want, at least for its interaction with httpd trunk... that's admittedly not a review, just a data point.
Let me see what else I can do to get this going... On Feb 10, 2011, at 1:13 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 2/10/2011 8:27 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> What's holding us up for a release of apu-1.4.0? > > There have been calls for API review, nobody answered them. I'd vote -1 > at this point in time to ship unreviewed API additions and have already > pointed out function argument signature flaws that must be fixed. (Turns > out apr_dbd was used as the 'model', but apr_dbd itself was flawed in > that respect from its introduction, and should be corrected at 2.0). > Also the apr_crypto_device_ctx should never be passed, it should become > part of the apr_crypto_ctx structure itself. Stack bytes are much worse > than heap bytes. And I haven't seen clear feedback of original critics > that their concerns were answered in the most recent refactorings. > > Turning the question around, what are you waiting for from apu-1.4.0 and > are you willing to add your review? >
