httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apachen STATUS
Date Thu, 08 Jan 1998 21:23:45 GMT
> I am not saying that this is necessarily the way to go for Apache, but I
> do agree with Dean.  The current setup sucks.  I for one would be testing
> a heck of a lot more patches if I could just cvs update and recompile.  I
> don't have the cycles in my day to manually patch things.  That's 
> obviously how we are finding most of the problems right now anyway.  Lots of
> patches that get +1'ed end up causing things to break anyway and this is
> caught months later instead of right away because of the current setup.

Sounds like a major topic for discussion...

Some more: Why NOW? Aren't we doing beta for 1.3? Aren't we trying
to fix things and not add things? Why the need for this free-for-all?

How long has PHP3 been in development? Was this the route for PHP2?
Did the fact that PHP3 is a total rewrite influence this change?

Why I think the current process makes sense (although there is always
room for improvement):

  1. It requires group involvement.
  2. By making sure "everyone" sees and approves the code,
     there is less risk that if the original person leaves
     that people would see that section of code and wonder
     what the heck it's about. In other words, it creates some
     sort of "group memory".
  3. In means everyone in the group is marching to the same
     beat, and not just a bunch of people doing what they
  4. It _creates_ group discussion. The other method would, IMO,
     be more apt to reduce it as people focus on what they
     want and ignore everything/everybody else.
  5. IMO, by focusing the development as a _team_ effort,
     I think the quality would be better.
      Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services           |
            "Look at me! I'm wearing a cardboard belt!"

View raw message