httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: 1.3 veto ?
Date Thu, 09 Jan 1997 22:04:54 GMT
Rob Hartill wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Alexei Kosut wrote:
> > Remember, we were supposed to have 1.2.0 out by the end of August, and
> > then we were going to get right to work on 2.0. It's January
> > already. Don't bother talking about a 1.3, please... I'm vetoing it
> > right now.
> A mod_ssl ready Apache would be *real* nice. If 1.3 isn't allowed to fly,
> call it 2.0 and Alexei can work on 3.0   :-b
> Seriously, I've no objections to a 1.3/2.0 split at this point. There's
> plenty of mileage left in the 1.0 code and plenty of changes that are
> in the queue but feature-frozen out of 1.2. It's gonna be a long wait for
> 2.0
> Alexei, please remind me what your objections are to 1.3.
> Anyway, we should decide if vetoing a code split is allowed or not. Vetoing
> the release of 1.3 because it's not up to scratch is reasonable, refusing
> it a chance to prove itself isn't reasonable (IMO) - if enough people are
> willing to work on it and the results are worthy of a release then that
> seems good enough reason for me to allow people to try.
> The only condition I'd put on a 2.0/1.3 split would be that the 1.*
> line officially stops when 2.0 has a beta release timetable.

I think that 2.0 won't be out for quite awhile if it's expected to
do all we've been talking about. As such, 1.2 will have quite a long
shelflife. Considering all the good features that are floating
around at this point, I think it would be a mistake not to have them
in a working version before 2.0. If 1.3 is vetoed, then I would
want 1.2 delayed until these are folded in.

If 1.3 is a viable option, 1.2 can be put out soon, and 1.3 and 2.0 can
be worked concurrently, with 1.3 being basically the feature available
now but not added to 1.2

      Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services           |
                  "Not the Craw... the CRAW!"

View raw message