Re: file_handle_cache branch ready for review

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Branko Čibej <brane_at_apache.org> wrote:
> On 09.01.2012 14:56, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> Until we can change the minimum required version of APR, it just isn't
>> worth the hassle. -Hyrum
>
> We can change the minimum required version of APR any time we want,
> really. Our API versioning guidelines aren't /that/ set in stone. Sure,
> we'd have to announce that we plan to stop supporting apr-0.9.x long
> enough in advance, but since we already "support" two different ABIs,
> that's the same as saying we picked one ABI over another.
>
> Once we're down that road, we can pick, e.g., 1.3 instead of the latest
> release, and go with that.

I would *love* to do this, and have been arguing for it for years. I
always get rebuffed by the "0.9 isn't ABI-compatible with 1.x, so we'd
have to go 2.0" crowd. If we can reach consensus to finally do this,
I'm happy to help work out the details.

> For something like the filehandle cache, which is not a functional
> requirement, we can then use it if APR has it, or just not use it if it
> doesn't.

Sure, and that jives with what we've done in the past. We can also
eventually bump the minimum APR requirements so that we can guarantee
the APR implementation exists.

-Hyrum

-- 
uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
http://www.uberSVN.com/