On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Bert Huijben <b...@qqmail.nl> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com] >> Sent: dinsdag 28 januari 2014 12:12 >> To: Bert Huijben >> Cc: Branko Čibej; dev@subversion.apache.org >> Subject: Re: 1.9 issues >> >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Bert Huijben <b...@qqmail.nl> wrote: >> >... >> > +1 on moving it to another header file, but I'm not sure about the >> > requirement for yet another library... especially with a name that tells > the >> > user nothing... Every library is a 'tool'. >> >> Agreed. >> >> And how solid are these? Should they hang in include/private for one >> release? >> >> I look at mtcc.h and the header is *broken*. The #define guard is >> wrong, there is no extern "C" in there. It seems immature, and not >> ready for immediate release. > > mtcc.h is a library internal header. The public api is currently in > svn_client.h. That is what all the discussion is about.
I am well aware that client/mtcc.h is internal. And it is still broken, which gives me an indication of its maturity/review. Thus, my query/concern on keeping it private for now. > So thanks for directly jumping to a conclusion based on a subset of the > information; and without looking at the actual code. I *did* look at the code. So, frankly... <censored>. [ why did you feel the need to do that? ] > [If you don't see an import of mtcc.h in mtcc-test.c and in svmucc.c, > perhaps that should tell you that you don't look at the right header, or > even the right api...] I looked at the correct header. And now, you've gone and shifted all this around to a public header, even after I expressed concern about doing that. Why? And your minor fixes to mtcc.h didn't deal with the extern issue. -g
