httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <>
Subject Re: One more patch for 1.0.0
Date Wed, 13 Dec 1995 17:08:41 GMT
> > >Adam, is this patch in response to a reported bug?  It seems to be a
> > >feature enhancement.  I'm very wary of introducing anything into the
> > >source of the 'stable' server that is not *directly* inspired by the
> > >need to stop the beast from core-dumping.
> > 
> > Then Apache development will grind to a halt, if in fact it has not already
> > done so. I really cannot understand this attitude; it's almost saying
> > `this server is so complicated that even an Einstein couldn't modify it
> > succesfully'. I could probably accept it if as a result there was
> > some positive action on the development version, but there isn't.
> > Beware; at this rate we may have another Shambhala (or even another Apache).
> Count to 10, it's almost christmas ;)
> 1)	There are now 2 source trees:
> 	a)	Apache 1.0.1 (the result of applying for_Apache_1.0.0's
> 		patches to 1.0.0), this is for show stopper bugs only and
> 		functional enhancements don't belong here.  This is the
> 		tree we're playing with at the moment because there are some
> 		nasty bugs in the version of the software we've just released
> 		and we need to get them sorted out sharpish.
> 	b)	Apache 1.1.0a1 (the result of applying the first round of
> 		blue-sky, gee-wiz, wouldn't it be cool if-patches to 1.0.0)
> 		This *is* for functional enhancements.  And the latest use-at
> 		your-own-risk betas will be derived from it.
> 2)	The idea is to keep the 1.0.1 tree for bug fixes only (yawn, boring),
> 	and to apply all our creative juices to enhancing the 1.1.0a1 tree
> 	(kuhl, interesting, no sleep this weekend),  rolling in any bug fixes
> 	that 1.0.1 throws up subsequently.
> 3)	If you want positive action in developing *new* functionality on the
> 	1.1.0a1 tree then go and do it, there are some patches already there
> 	and I know that lots of people have new ideas forthcoming.
> 4)	People are looking at the CVS system as a means for maintining the
> 	source tree, I dunno what the implications will be for the sources.
> 	I'm waiting to see what happens.

Just one argument with all of this: the new experimental version is supposed
to be called 1.1b1, and thence 1.1b2, 1.1b3 ... 1.1b<n>, 1.1.0, 1.1.1 ...
1.1.<n>. At the point when 1.1b<n> becomes 1.1.0, we release 1.2b1. Actually,
we haven't formally agreed that the letter is b, but it is the only candidate
with any noticable support. I ought to be more carefule when formulating calls
for votes.

Did I ever mention that I was a pedant?

> > Presumably, therefore, you veto all the patches currently available.
> I don't think you believe this to be true.
> > Death of Internet predicted; more at 11.
> > 
> >  David.
> Ay.



Ben Laurie                  Phone: +44 (181) 994 6435
Freelance Consultant        Fax:   +44 (181) 994 6472
and Technical Director      Email:
A.L. Digital Ltd,           URL:
London, England.

View raw message