Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 1:19 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net <mailto:wr...@rowe-clan.net>> wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
traw...@apache.org <mailto:traw...@apache.org> wrote:
Author: trawick
Date: Mon Mar 2 17:40:33 2009
New Revision: 749375
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=749375&view=rev
<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=749375&view=rev>
Log:
improve acceptance of APR/APR-Util trunk/2.0-dev
On my other comment earlier...
-1 on this patch appearing in any alpha candidate of 1.3 yet,
for the
reasons I mentioned before. If it's sitting on trunk, that's
fine, we'll
just break things again as 2.0 nears release.
I meant - an alpha candidate of 2.3 yet ;-) My point being, due to
the API contracts in APR, we should not be encouraging alpha testers to
"install" 2.0. 1.3 is current and 1.4 branch exists for bleeding stuff.
Bill
I certainly agree for httpd 2.4.
It is worth stating in the alpha announcements which apr level(s) they
are intended to be used with.
I doubt many people will worry if the alphas have code that enforces
that, or fails haphazardly with other levels, or actually builds with
other levels, as long as it works with the documented level(s).
Ok, I can see how, for the average user, we will bundle for now with 1.3 and
this change should break nothing (yet), so retracting my -1 so we simplify
the vote-in-progress :)
Bill
