httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.C...@Golux.Com>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apache-1.3 STATUS
Date Fri, 08 May 1998 19:47:11 GMT wrote:
> dgaudet     98/05/08 12:06:09
>   Modified:    .        STATUS
>   Log:
>   sorry ken, I changed my mind... radically.

If what you describe were the whole story, I might be convinced to agree -
but it's not, and I don't.  You're taking a very narrow view, IMHO.

>          STATUS:
>           o Scrap it now that modules can use ap_add_version_component
>             Jim +1 (make sure this is clear :) ), Brian +1, Ken +1
>   +      Dean: -1, and I am also vetoing the new AddVersionComponent
>   +     directive.  My reason is: if a module is "significant" then
>   +     it will ap_add_version_component(); if a patch is
>   +     "significant" then it can modify SERVER_SUBVERSION.  There are
>   +     no other *code* changes possible that the admin should be
>   +     noting.  If folks really want to play the customized server
>   +     version game they can recompile, or build a module to do it.
>   +     If we put it in the default server we'll end up seeing lots of
>   +     funny (read: annoying) false things start to appear.

Item: IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE VERSION.  It *adds* to it, at the end.  I'm
      assuming that the 'false things' you mean are wrong statistics
      from things like Netcraft - which this won't cause.
Item: Changing the source isn't always possible.
Item: Not all Webmasters *want* to become Apache code hackers.

It sounds as though you think httpd is the be-all and end-all of an
Apache site.  If it's not contained in the httpd binary, then it
doesn't count.  I disagree.  What percentage of thousands of Apache
users out there *want* to frob the code?  I'm in favour of flexibility,
not imposing a personal world-view of How Things Should Be on people
who are quite probably using the server in ways I can't even imagine.

You know what?  It's this kind of crap that has slowed down my code
contributions of late.  It was the expectation that whatever I did would
be vetoed that kept me from doing anything about this issue until now.
I finally screwed up my courage, and guess what happens.  Oh, well.

So now it's my turn, I guess.  I'd like to hear from [some of] the lurkers
on this list whether they think run-time *additions* to the server version
are a good thing, neutral, or a bad thing.  If a majority say the former,
Dean, I'd like to ask you to reconsider.  Otherwise, *I'll* shut up about
it.  But the goal should be to make the server more capable for our
*users*, and not just impose our opinions on them.

Reply to me for confidentiality, or to the list..

#ken	P-/}

Ken Coar                    <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Group member         <>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://WWW.Dummies.Com/

View raw message