httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: Apache 164 percent speed increase
Date Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:13:00 GMT
In a message dated 99-10-13 08:42:52 EDT, you write:
> wrote:
>  > 
>  > There is no need for a CVS 'diff' or a PATCH on this.
>  > It's just a simple mistake and needs a quick re-type
>  > on the part of someone who knows where the 'real' master
>  > source module is.
>  You've been here long enough to know that's not how things
>  work.  

I've also been here long enough to know that if you don't
have or use CVS it's pretty hard to send up the only patches
that you people will accept.

The first thing I do whenever there is a new release of Apache
is download it and dump it into my OWN source code revision
system which is far superior to CVS. 

I DO NOT USE CVS. Understand? If that's all you will accept
then you won't be getting any code from me... just messages
that tell you what to go fix. If you are not set up to handle
people who do NOT use CVS then I can't help you at all.

> Your remark is roughly equivalent to "I know what
>  the problem is and how to fix it, but I'm only going to
>  tell you about it rather than supplying the fix I already
>  have."

See above. I do NOT USE CVS. I don't even have it and
I don't WANT to have it. It's crap.
>  Besides, as Marc points out, this was already fixed. :-)

That's good. Was it fixed with an actual 'patch'? I actually
don't think it was. Where is that patch?

Whenever I WAS workng with PVCS and CVS and **whatever**CS
I seem to recall that there were always times when the
fastest thing to do was just fix a typo in the tree and add
the '++' or '!!' or whatever so it shows up in a revision pull but not 
every freakin' little typo needed to go the full monty.
I mean c'mon... it was just a typo.

Kevin Kiley
CTO, Remote
RCTPDS real-time online document compression server

View raw message