Re: RFC: APR 2.0 modularization
Nick Kew <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.apache.apr.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> On 20 Apr 2024, at 11:38, Ivan Zhakov <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > In APR 2.0 we merged APR-Util **project** to APR. Which is IMHO a good thing. Um, apr-util was a separate library, but not really a separate project. The separation may have been a little OTT, but merging them runs into "ain't broke, don't fix", with likely confusion arising from the change to a familiar status-quo. But that's just a view from about 20 years too late. > I would suggest separating APR in different libraries, while keeping them in one project/source tree. > > Something like that: > - apr-2 > - apr-dbd-2 > - apr-dbm-2 > - apr-xlate-2 (?) > - apr-crypto-2 > - apr-xml-2 > - apr-ldap-2 > - apr-memcache-2 > - apr-redis-2 Works in principle, though packagers and users should probably have an apr-everything option alongside those. The question is, is it worth it for such a marginal change? Have you looked in to the practicalities and verified no major stumbling blocks, bearing in mind that developer effort tends to be thin on the ground? -- Nick Kew