httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apache-2.0 STATUS
Date Wed, 18 Mar 1998 19:18:48 GMT
On Wed, 18 Mar 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:

> 
> 
> On Wed, 18 Mar 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
> > To some extent, sure, but not that much. We all have very different
> > schedules... We all realize that. But using that as an argument against
> > something is no more fair than saying "I don't think we should use
> > XXX's idea because who knows if he'll be around to work on it."
> > Certainly we've seen major sections of code lie dormant for awhile
> > and then  WOOSH! a rush of activity as someone's schedule opens
> > up... That's the nature of the beast :)
> 
> So you would rather programmers spend time re-inventing the autoconf wheel
> rather than spending time improving apache?  Hardly seems worth it to me. 

Exactly.

Note that we can still use Configure and have it do all the autoconf mess
to figure out platform specific stuff if we want to.  I don't think there
is any need for the autoconf interface from the user perspective to come
into it at all unless we want it.

ie. chop the platform-specific stuff (most of it; we still do have
settings that are based on what we want, not what the platform can do and
autoconf can't guess those) and plug in autoconf behind Configure to
figure it all out.  

Or we can toss Configure and go autoconf all the way, although there
several people here with issues with doing that, me included.

Either way I see no harm in using autoconf for the backend OS detection
stuff and a lot of gain.


Mime
View raw message