> On 20 Apr 2024, at 11:38, Ivan Zhakov <chemo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In APR 2.0 we merged APR-Util **project** to APR. Which is IMHO a good thing.
Um, apr-util was a separate library, but not really a separate project.
The separation may have been a little OTT, but merging them runs into
"ain't broke, don't fix", with likely confusion arising from the change to a
familiar status-quo. But that's just a view from about 20 years too late.
> I would suggest separating APR in different libraries, while keeping them in
> one project/source tree.
>
> Something like that:
> - apr-2
> - apr-dbd-2
> - apr-dbm-2
> - apr-xlate-2 (?)
> - apr-crypto-2
> - apr-xml-2
> - apr-ldap-2
> - apr-memcache-2
> - apr-redis-2
Works in principle, though packagers and users should probably have an
apr-everything
option alongside those. The question is, is it worth it for such a marginal
change?
Have you looked in to the practicalities and verified no major stumbling blocks,
bearing in mind that developer effort tends to be thin on the ground?
--
Nick Kew
