Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 5010 invoked by uid 6000); 11 Dec 1999 22:11:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 5002 invoked from network); 11 Dec 1999 22:11:34 -0000 Received: from nebula.lyra.org (gstein@216.98.236.100) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 11 Dec 1999 22:11:34 -0000 Received: from localhost (gstein@localhost) by nebula.lyra.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA20815 for ; Sat, 11 Dec 1999 14:13:05 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 14:13:05 -0800 (PST) From: Greg Stein To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: IPv6 In-Reply-To: <199912112035.PAA16703@devsys.jaguNET.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org Status: O On Sat, 11 Dec 1999, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Ryan Bloom wrote: > > If we are talking about a minimum of another four months before we put in > > some of these much requested features, we aren't servicing our users very > > well. We have the patches, in some cases, we have had the patches for a > > few releases already. We need to include them if it is possible. Waiting > > for 2.0 doesn't make sense until we get closer to actually releasing 2.0. > > Not only that, but just because 2.0 "is" released, it doesn't mean > that people will immediately move over to it, esp for production, > high-end servers. All right. No problem... Just had to ask the question, since we had (ahem) "decided" :-) a while back to freeze the 1.3 features. We can, of course, change our minds, but it wasn't obviously clear that we had. Dang, and I have been refraining from DAV-related changes... feh. :-) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/