httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <>
Subject Re: Whither 1.2.1 versus 1.3?
Date Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:00:21 GMT
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> What about all the stuff that was held up while we got 1.2 out?
> Fold these in or not?
> So, is the plan work on 1.3 and _then_ 2.0 ? If so, then we better
> have some real good guidelines on what 1.3 is supposed to look
> like otherwise it'll be 1.2 all over again and 2.0 will be delayed
> yet again.
> No matter what, even if there is little to gain for UNIX OSs with
> 1.3 over 1.2, people _will_ move to 1.3 when it's announced. I think
> that 1.3 should be 1.2 + NT + the_waiting_patches. Then again,
> the NT stuff includes some level of multithreading which needs to
> be resolved as far as how it effects UNIX and 2.0: Either we don't
> use it for UNIX OSs (meaning we wait for a universal threaded Apache
> to be rel2.0) or we have some hack which will not only require
> intensive beta testing only to be scrapped (maybe) for 2.0... I
> can't see the sense of the later :/

My view is that 1.3 should simply introduce NT support (+ bugfixes). The reason
being that if we do all the waiting patches, it'll take ages to release an NT
version, whereas I think we can have it quite quickly if we concentrate on it.

If the waiting patches want to go into a release, it should be 1.4.

On the multithreading for Unix - no for 1.3, perhaps for 1.4.

I'm neutral on the question of whether there should be a 1.4 or whether we
should concentrate on 2.0.

I think I'll add it to my sig - "No More Delays For NT!".

BTW, whoever said August for 2.0 has their head in the clouds, IMHO. Or did
they mean August '98?



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

View raw message