httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian Behlendorf <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apachen STATUS
Date Fri, 09 Jan 1998 03:58:37 GMT
At 10:33 PM 1/8/98 -0500, Gregory A Lundberg wrote:
>On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:
>[LINK] bug databse
>  Access denied .. it seems I'm not an 'insider'.  We're off to a good
>  start.  Here I thought I'd find a reported bug and have something useful
>  to work on and actually help out.

For obvious reasons write access to the bugdb is controlled, but we are
more open about granting those privileges than commit access to the code.
If you feel you could help out there, ask on the list and we'll create an
account for you.

>[LINK] mailing lists
>  Directory index, scads of gz files .. maybe I'll grab em all, expand 'em
>  and read 'em?

I've got a really cool spec for a WWW gateway to mail archives.  Hypermail
is vastly insufficient.  got some coding time?  Failing that, raw monthly
mailbox files have seemed to be the best compromise - it's easy to download
and scan.

>[LINK] Apache Project Plan
>  Nice outline.

And way out of date.

>[LINK] Random notes about using CVS and maintaining the Apache Site.
>  I don't use CVS and can't maintain the site .. but look! there's the
>  reference to the from-cvs directory.  Good thing you seemed so sure it
>  was here, if I were just browsing, I'd probably have missed it.


>[LINK] To-do list last updated Jun 1996
>  I peeked 'cause I'm going through the entire site .. looks like it's so
>  old it should be deleted, though.

Scary!  Indeed.

>[LINK] Latest source tree
>  I'll get that with the from-cvs so I won't burn any more cycles in
>  there.
>[LINK] Web-based access to the CVS tree.
>  Interesting.  But again, why burn the cycles?  I'll ftp a tarball and
>  can browse locally a lot faster.

Sometimes you want to see what changes something like suexec.c has gone
through, and why.  You'd have to download the whole CVS tree through cvsup.

>Mailing lists
>  Looks interesting but from the way it's worded I'll bet it's a closed
>  list.

Nope, open.  in fact, if you're a member of this list you can reply to bug
reports, doing the initial screening and such.

>  Yep, it's referenced there too.
>Now the big question .. how was I supposed to know even ran
>a web site?  I don't think I've seen it linked from and I
>just grep'd the docs from the 1.2.5 source tarball and there's nothing
>there.  I suppose lurking on the new-httpd list would eventually expose
>its existance (hey, it worked today for me).  Maybe everyone who'd like to
>muck arround with the server will lurk for months until someone drops a
>hint. and new-httpd are not mentioned on the site
as an attempt to, crudely, "keep the barbarians outside the gates".  Maybe
that should be changed.  At the very least should be
mentioned in the welcome message to new-httpd.  I think I'll go edit it to
do that.


specialization is for insects

View raw message