You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@apr.apache.org by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> on 2006/03/21 08:36:46 UTC

1.95.2? Why?

Just curious, but if we are continuing to roll in expat, at least for the
remaining life of APR 0.9 / 1.x (ripping it out of APR 2.0 at the earliest)
why haven't we cared enough to bump this?  Maybe some svn'ers who use this
functionality can comment.

Also I'm curious if the newly released 2.0.0 remains binary compatibile.

Bill

Re: 1.95.2? Why?

Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 3/20/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> 
>>Just curious, but if we are continuing to roll in expat, at least for the
>>remaining life of APR 0.9 / 1.x (ripping it out of APR 2.0 at the earliest)
>>why haven't we cared enough to bump this?  Maybe some svn'ers who use this
>>functionality can comment.
> 
> APR has a number of build system tweaks to expat in order to get it
> play nice as a bundle and for Win32, IIRC.

So if a voulenteer is needed to merge our win32 and unix patches, you have
one.  My question is, do we really want to continue shipping nearly 5 year
old code, or is it time to move at least to 1.95.08, given your impressions
below?  Are there fixes that are relevant to our current apr_xml users?

>>Also I'm curious if the newly released 2.0.0 remains binary compatibile.
> 
> Source-compatible, mostly.  Binary, I don't believe so.
> 
> (There are some features in 2.0.0 that I wish we could make
> available.)  -- justin

Good things to add for 2.0.0 apr?

Re: 1.95.2? Why?

Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On 3/20/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Just curious, but if we are continuing to roll in expat, at least for the
> remaining life of APR 0.9 / 1.x (ripping it out of APR 2.0 at the earliest)
> why haven't we cared enough to bump this?  Maybe some svn'ers who use this
> functionality can comment.

APR has a number of build system tweaks to expat in order to get it
play nice as a bundle and for Win32, IIRC.

> Also I'm curious if the newly released 2.0.0 remains binary compatibile.

Source-compatible, mostly.  Binary, I don't believe so.

(There are some features in 2.0.0 that I wish we could make
available.)  -- justin