httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: this 1.3b1 fiasco
Date Thu, 11 Sep 1997 19:52:07 GMT
Dean Gaudet wrote:
> Ken's veto was in relation to your release schedule, which is now moot. 

I thought it was due to his desire to push 1.3 along. In any case, you
do not have the authority to declare anyone's -1 as "moot".

> >From here on out I'll fix bugs only.  I'm certainly not going to work on
> features.  I can't stand this fucking bickering. 

Only because someone thinks there should be a bit more _group_ control
over the code, and not become anyone's personal playground.

We were both trying to do what we thought was right for 1.3. My
direction was to get it out asap; your's was to add many new features
and improvements to it while you could. IMO, I thought that we could
get 1.3 out, fold your patches in and then continue with 2.0. So
your features and additions would _not_ simply fade on the vine,
but would be included with 2.0, the whole idea being the less
we pump into 1.3, the faster and less frequent the betas. Even you
admit yourself that the buffered log patches have not been
incredibly in-depth tested. All I said was "can't it wait?"
I don't think that's such a terrible question.

I'm sorry if you think the idea of someone trying to maintain
some sort of path and schedule for Apache is enough to prevent
you from using your obvious talents in keeping Apache so
fucking cool. IMO that would be a terrible loss and I would
regret that, as I think all of us would. But I'll be damned if
I'll take blame for it. I had every right to make my comments.
If you think that's enough to go off out of spite, well, that's
too bad.

      Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services           |
            "Look at me! I'm wearing a cardboard belt!"

View raw message