Re: cvs commit: apr-site versioning.html
Greg Stein wrote: And that 0.9.0 is going to be whatever is in APR today. If somebody wants their darned pet feature in 1.0, then they can get it code before that date. But I want something *versioned* *today*. SVN users are dyin' cuz we can't point people at a specific APR release. The best we can do is "use CVS HEAD", which (of course) sucks ass. After a release, at least we can say "use at least 0.9.0". +1. Let's see if we can get APR to 1.0 before Subversion hits Beta. :-) -- Brane Äibej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
Re: cvs commit: apr-site versioning.html
Brian Pane wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Ultimately, we must be able to roundtrip from a stat() into a utime() style call without loosing the old value... at least down to the usec. Many systems will track file times down to the msec, at a minimum. Doesn't Posix require these fields to be in seconds? Might do. Don't know or care, because Windoes gives me msecs, and I don't want to lose them. -- Brane Äibej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
