httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Stoddard <>
Subject Re: Where to start the Apache 2.0 code base
Date Tue, 03 Aug 1999 18:15:50 GMT
"Roy T. Fielding" wrote:
> >There seems to be three camps on the best way to create the Apache 2.0
> >code base.
> >
> >Camp 1: Use the apache-mpm tree as the base. Merge 1.3.8 changes up into
> >Apache 2.0.
> >Dean, Ben L., Jim, Bill
> >
> >Camp 2: Use 1.3.8 as the base, then add MPM, HOOKS, APR, etc.
> >Roy, Ken
> Actually, what I said was that you'll want to do camp 1 stuff first
> in any case, and camp 2 can happen when someone who cares about it
> can do it.
> In any case, as I said before, the clean repository can be done at any
> time after mpm is merged up with 1.3.x and apr, provided that you folks
> are willing to identify what changes are for what purpose given a
> single large recursive diff between 1.3.8 and 2.x.
> ....Roy

This is a great big apple ugly and I don't know which end to bite first

Here is what is bugging me... You seem to be advocating continuing work
on apache-mpm, then at some point, merging apache-mpm with apache-1.3.8
to create Apache-2.0. It seems a complete waste to time to keep
enhancing apache-mpm if we are going to use apache 1.3.8 as the base.
The further apache-mpm diverges from it's origins, the more difficult it
will be to merge those changes into the apache 1.3.8 base in a way that
maintains meaningful history. Especially the APR changes. If you do not
agree, please explain how you propose to do it because I don't
understand. IMHO, if we are going to base Apache-2.0 on Apache-1.3.8, we
need to do it NOW.

I'll attempt to restate the essence of what I think you are advocating.
Correct me if I miss the point...
1. Copy Apache 1.3.8 into the top level Apache 2.0 repository
2. Tag the Apache 1.3.8 repository to identify the point the copy was
made. Apache 1.3.8 will no doubt be tweaked a few more times, perhaps to
1.3.9 or whatever...
3. Reversion all the Apache 2.0 files to 1.1
4. Add the mpm changes
5. Add the APR changes
6. Add the HOOKS changes
7. Add ...
n. Add ... 
n+1. test and beta release when ready...

At each stage 4-n, document the design decisions behind each change. The
order of 4-n is not actually that important. Is this sufficient history?
Is maintaining the entire muddled history through the apache-apr and
apache-mpm repositories important? I view these repositories as
sandboxes, so their history is not important. The boundaries between 4-n
are not going to be nice and crisp. MPM changes will will be
interspersed with APR changes, etc. Same for HOOKS changes. This is just
the nature of the beast. 

Bill Stoddard

View raw message