httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apache/src CHANGES Configuration.tmpl Makefile.tmpl
Date Tue, 30 Jul 1996 18:06:09 GMT
Alexei Kosut wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 30 Jul 1996, Paul Richards wrote:
> 
> > > My only real concern is that including the regex package does seem to
> > > imply that we support it. If the package doesn't compile on Platform
> > > X, I would expect that Platform X user would write to _us_ about the
> > > problem and expect _us_ to help him/her out. I'm not sure if that's
> > > what we want. 
> 
> If platform X has no (or a broken) regex package, and it can't compile
> Spencer's, then what? It seems to me that we *have* to either support the
> package, or not use regex capabilities in Apache. And we're already
> commited to the latter.

I do NOT think that we should commit ourselves to supporting Spencer's
package. No way. I think that _anything_ that causes us to do so is
way, way wrong. After all, we require an ANSI-C compiler. Should we then
include and support gcc? If we go to C++, then should we include and
support a C++ compiler?

We have a list of system requirements to compile and run Apache. Out of
the kindness of our hearts, we provide a regex package in case an OS
doesn't provide one, but we do NOT support it. I think anything we
can do to help out systems that don't have the requirements is a Good
Thing, but I don't want the group backed into a corner where we have
to support not only Apache itself, but a regex package as well.

This will, of course, all come back again when we start seriously considering
the threaded server, which requires sfio and rsthreads. I'm sure that
rsthreads will "become" an "official" supported code-base, but does it
also mean that we have to actively support sfio as well? Ouch!

> 
> > Agreed. We should use the native regex code by default but provide a simple
> > switch to use /support/regex if they don't have one. We definately *shouldn't*
> > get into the business of maintaining regex code, there are plenty of perfectly
> > competent groups already doing exactly that.
> 
> So we support the regex package by making sure that we keep it up to date
> and pass on bugs to the maintainer. Makes lots of sense to me.
> 

Define "up to date"? Do we fix bugs or just apply patches provided by
the maintainer? If the latter, then we are we in the loop at all?
Wouldn't it be easier to have people send bug-fixes right to HS? And what
about the various changes we've made to the code to have it compile
cleanly for Apache? Will there be 2 code-bases? This can get _very_ sticky
unless we have things clear to start with.

-- 
Jim Jagielski  << jim@jaguNET.com >>   |   "There is a time for laughing,
  **  jaguNET Access Services  **      |    and a time for not laughing,
      Email: info@jaguNET.com          |    and this is not one of them"
++    http://www.jaguNET.com/         +++      Voice/Fax: 410-931-3157       ++

Mime
View raw message