Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by hyperreal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id GAA16076;
	Fri, 6 Jun 1997 06:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DECUS.Org (Topaz.DECUS.Org [192.67.173.1])
	by hyperreal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA16072
	for <New-HTTPd@apache.org>; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 06:02:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Lucy.DECUS.Org (lucy.process.com) by DECUS.Org (PMDF V4.2-13
 #18511) id <01IJQW7I0JRK8WWBZM@DECUS.Org>; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 09:02:38 EDT
Received: from master.process.com by Lucy.DECUS.Org;
 (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/16Sep96-0258PM) id AA09069; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 09:06:12 -0400
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 1997 09:01:45 -0400
From: coar@decus.org (Rodent of Unusual Size)
Subject: Re: [STATUS] Fri Jun  6 08:12:55 EDT 1997
To: New-HTTPd@apache.org, Coar@decus.org
Message-id: <97060609014515@decus.org>
X-VMS-To: NH
X-VMS-Cc: COAR
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

>From the fingers of Ben Laurie flowed the following:
>
>Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>  * Debate branching
>
>Hasn't that bit finished?

    Personally, I find Roy's concerns, plus various other comments,
    disturbing.  I've never lived through a branch-versus-module
    experience, though, so I'm just an interested observer.  I'm
    expecting 2.0 to evolve quickly enough that in a couple of months
    maintaining any sort of cross-checking or compatibility with the 1.2
    sources will be meaningless, so I'd almost prefer the simplicity of
    a separate module.  Based upon my limited understanding, of course.

    #ken    :-)}