"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> There is no question about APR stability or release-like quality. As long
> as APR people are not certain the API will not change and don't put the "1.0"
> label on it.

I have insider news on this (me and David Reid hang out pretty often
together, he taught me how to drink beer), and the API is _very_ stable on
the stuff used in WebApp...

>> A third one could be an API merger between the two... If you want to talk
>> about it...
> 
> Between jk/common and apr ? I don't think so, jk was designed from
> beginning as a placeholder until APR is ready, based on the same APIs ( at
> that time - APR changed quite a bit in the last year ).
> 
> I prefer the first solution ( with a transition period when both apr or
> the current code could be used ), but in the end the portability code in
> jk will be just removed.

No, I meant between JK and WebApp... :)

>> MMAP is the other scary stuff in APR, the new code (without Ralph's libmm)
>> it no more than one month old... I need it for load balancing, but I want to
>> double check with the guys in CA next week and see what they tell me before
>> publishing anything..
> 
> Yes, load balancing, also for NIO, and also for faster communication in
> ajp14.

NIO is kinda cool if used in multi threaded applications... Dunno that much
about in multi process... Worth discussing...

    Pier

Reply via email to