httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Stoddard" <stodd...@raleigh.ibm.com>
Subject Re: 1.3.13 - Complete some Win32 PRs???
Date Thu, 13 Apr 2000 15:48:49 GMT
> First off, the list has grown fairly long in changes 1.3.13/dev
> Many of these changes are Win32, so I don't know that there is
> sufficient momentum to begin targeting a date for 1.3.13.
>
> Q.  [all] Are we moving to set a date to 1.3.13?
>
I'd prefer to hold off on a 1.3.13 for perhaps another month or so. As you have pointed
out, there are a number of patches to integrate. The problem is that it takes quite a bit
of effort to roll a release and what time folks do have is being spent on Apache 2.0.

> Q.  [all] If not, is a 1.3.13/int-Win32 release appropriate?

Probably not.

>
> Q.  If I send a set of -clean-, -tested- diff -u 's of the
>     incomplete Win32 work, that is;  mod_proxy cleanup, taskbar
>     icon upon minimize, JJ Keijser's Win95/98 run-as-service,
>     and the most compact mod_info changes possible,
>
>     and most importantly, a patch to hold the console window
>     open (until it is dismissed) if the server exits with an
>     error (so the GUI fools can see what they broke),
>
>     and I port these patches to 2.0, as appropriate, then
>
>     Will an individual commit to committing these to 1.3.13,
>     and the alpha-4?  You've seen the quality of my patches,
>     and these changes only touch the Win32 code path.
>
>     I know I won't have trouble finding someone to back them
>     out if they break a single thing, so I intend to get it
>     right on the first pass :~}

Some of these changes are quite extensive thus require detailed review, especially since
they are going into the 1.3 code base. I'll review the smaller patches for sure.  Can't
make any promises on the mod_proxy patch (which I did look at BTW).

>
> Q.  [Win32/dev] Are you willing to test these fixes?  I can
>     only test the 95/NT 4.0-sp6a versions today.  I will even
>     try to test the 98 patches, thou I don't have the dev
>     tools installed on that platform.
>
> I am -not- proposing to overhaul 1.3.anything.  Bare minimum
> changes to fix only these open issues.  The 2.0 fix may be
> more generic/flexible.
>
> I feel the ASF does not take the 1.3/Win32 port seriously.

Uummm, I wouldn't quite put it that way. Most of us are Unix developers. I am pretty much
the primary Windows developer and I only do it part time. More developers focusing on the
Windows port, like yourself, will help a lot.

> Many patches have taken months to hit the tree, and other
> appropriate patches have been ignored -without comment-.
> This is really not acceptable.

Guilty, guilty, guilty as charged. We as a group have really fallen down on this. At a
minimum, folks with commit privs should update the STATUS file with info & pointers to
submitted patches. I can only say I will try to do better in the future.

I am really happy to have you contributing to the project. Beginnings are often a bit
rocky and we are a persnickity bunch, but you've accepted advice graciously and we are
getting more of your patches rolled into the code as a result. Thank you and keep
contributing!

Bill



Mime
View raw message