> > A much more important question that we need to start thinking > > now about is how set are we on this module API? Are we going to > > allow changes to go into 2.0 that require module authors to > > modify their code? I believe I'm pretty dead set against that. > > 2.0 API is now closed. If we want to change the API, we need > > to do it in a 2.1. But, I think we need a set policy. That > > requires discussion here on-list. Hopefully, we can start > > that now. I believe the answer to this question dictates how > > soon we open 2.1/3.0. > > And as a module writer, I'd like to see that API carved in stone for a > _long_ time now... It's basically only 3 months that I (in my extreme > dumbness of C, I admit) can write an Apache 2.0 module without starting to > cry trying to figure out what segfaults (my code or your code)...
We have never before frozen an API, and I would prefer that we didn't freeze this one. If an API needs to change, then it should be allowed to change. The important thing is that we don't change APIs just for the sake of changing APIs. I also believe that we have done a VERY good job of creating a structure that won't require API changes in 2.0. But, I don't think we should rule it out just because we went GA. Ryan
