Chris Grau <chris(a)chrisgrau.com> writes:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 09:01:09PM -0400, Chip Turner wrote:
> Warren Togami <wtogami(a)redhat.com> writes:
>
> > Jose Pedro Oliveira wrote:
> >> No. Just trying to play safe: this may avoid CGI/mod_perl related
> >> bugzilla entries from ppl that will upgrade the FC3 mod_perl 2 beta
> >> version to the final version.
> >> jpo
> >>
> >
> > The way I understand it, we had mod_perl 1.99 for *years*. Since 2 is
> > incompatible, doesn't it make sense to keep FC3 compatible with 1.99?
>
> 1.99 were all alphas/betas leading up to the 2.0 release. What leads
> you to believe it is incompatible? There shouldn't be anything that
> would break compatibility, except for bug fixes, which likely wouldn't
> break anything.
The mod_perl 1.999_23 (2.0.0rc5) release introduced a new, incompatible
API.
http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/rename.html
How nice of them! Boy that's gonna cause some headaches.
I'd just errata it in fc4 ASAP so that no one uses it before the
change hits :)
Chip
--
Chip Turner cturner(a)pattern.net