httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: Apache license and GZIP
Date Thu, 14 Oct 1999 23:20:28 GMT
In a message dated 99-10-14 20:10:23 EDT, you write:

> 1. No need to fit versions to each other. When a specific package
>     requires that another package will be present in version X and not
>     Y, it is already done by the distribution maintainer or vendor. The
>     best example for this is GNOME: When it is packaged in one package,
>     its build is "Click and Forget". When it is collected manually, its
>     build may take long days, and usually the result is a total failure.
>  2. Additional scripts for easy and/or better build and/or installation,
>     without modifying the original code.
>  3. No need to collect stuff from dozens of places; Everything is
>     packaged to one distro.
>  4. Sometimes, there are optimizations to help some packages to work
>     better with some other packages.

This is exactly what IBM is now doing with their HTTP Server
product on a CD. It has pre-built Apache right on the CD for all
of the reasons you cite. People are tired of dealing with all this.
IBM's distribution already contains the things that Apache will
never be 'allowed' to distribute and it's all tied together already
and customers just get to plug and play.

Obviously IBM did their homework on this with regards to 
customer billable man hours being spent reassebmling and updating
tons of UNIX things since I believe the price tag on the CD is upwards
of $27,000 with support included. If their customers see that as
a reasonable price tag for the 'all in one' package then that tells
you how many man hours the sites have been spending doing
the 'some (lot) of assembly required' thing.

There are MANY markets where people would gladly pay for
the shrink wrap if it meant just one less tar.gz download for them.

Kevin Kiley
CTO, Remote Communications, Inc.

View raw message