Nathan Hartman wrote on Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:13 +00:00:
> Daniel, thanks for testing this and documenting how. Please, could
> you add that as a comment in the issue tracker? Or, if you'd like,
> I'll be happy to do that and attribute it to you.
> I agree that this issue should be closed.
> From my reading, it looks like it was not closed as a reminder to move
> this to APR. (Though that might make sense from a refactoring
> standpoint, I think it would cause dependency headaches.)
It's not that bad; we've done it before. We create an svn__foo()
function, implement it, ask APR to add it too, then we use #if
APR_VERSION_AT_LEAST() to have svn__foo() use the APR implementation in
preference to ours, and remove the conditional and our implementation
when we bump the minimum supported APR version.
Received on 2019-11-12 19:08:20 CET