On 04/07/2017 04:31 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> >> On 04/07/2017 03:33 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 04/07/2017 10:37 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: >>>> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 04/07/2017 02:11 AM, yla...@apache.org wrote: >>>>>> Author: ylavic >>>>>> Date: Fri Apr 7 00:11:27 2017 >>>>>> New Revision: 1790490 >>>>>> >>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1790490&view=rev >>>>>> Log: >>>>>> Merge r1790488 from trunk: >>>>>> >>>>>> locks: follow up to r1667900. >>>>>> >>>>>> Axe the 'absolute' argument of apr_{thread,proc,global}_mutex_timedlock() >>>>>> which was confusing, hence 'timeout' is always relative now. >>>>> >>>>> Hm. Doesn't that violate the APR versioning rules? IMHO you can change an >>>>> existing public API only in a major release >>>>> aka. 2.0 in our case. >>>> >>>> Was never released (new to 1.6.x), does the rule apply? >>>> >>> >>> IMHO that does not matter. Apps that run with 1.5.x are expected to run >>> with 1.6.x. This wouldn't be the case here. >>> >> >> Or are apr_{thread,proc,global}_mutex_timedlock() new to APR 1.6 and are not >> part of 1.5.x and before? > > Yes that's the case (new to 1.6, not in 1.5), so no possible > regression but for the braves running 1.6.x :) >
Ah ok. Then it is fine of course. Regards Rüdiger
