Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 70036 invoked by uid 500); 26 Mar 2000 19:14:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 70022 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2000 19:14:47 -0000 Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 13:14:46 -0600 From: Manoj Kasichainula To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: apache-2.0/src/modules/standard mod_cgi.c mod_include.c Message-ID: <20000326131446.B18555@io.com> Mail-Followup-To: new-httpd@apache.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.7-current-20000302i In-Reply-To: ; from rbb@apache.org on Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 11:28:26AM -0500 X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 11:28:26AM -0500, Ryan Bloom wrote: > This design was discussed off-line. Like most commits here, code means > more than talk, so I implemented it, assuming people would comment and > change it as they saw fit. I didn't doo all that much work, most of the > work was debugging, not coding. :-) The general policy that I know of is to at least discuss major changes on the list to get a feel from the group. Even if they don't like the idea, you know going in to your work that they don't, and when others see your patch, they can understand its design because you already posted. Then, major functional patches are posted to the list for discussion, and then committed if there isn't objection.