httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@lnd.com>
Subject RE: BUFF, IOL, Chunking, and Unicode in 2.0 (long)
Date Tue, 02 May 2000 16:33:01 GMT
> From: dean gaudet [mailto:dgaudet-list-new-httpd@arctic.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2000 11:12 AM
> 
> On Tue, 2 May 2000, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> 
> > A few have argued recently that there is little point in releasing a
> > 2.0 revision, since it's a glorified 1.3.x without the truly application
> > independent APR.  I have to agree that APR, to date, is rather cobbled
> > together pieces of Apache.  Movement underway makes me believe this will
> > change over the course of the 2.0 release.
> > 
> > On the server side, for admins, we really don't have what would appear
> > to be a 'later and greater' set of features. 
> 
> yeah it's pretty amazing that it's taken us 2+ years to get 
> to this "sad"
> state isn't it?
> 
> it's pretty pathetic that a threaded apache on unix has been 
> delayed by such silly things as compatibility on NT.

Hmmm... haven't read over every post of the last two years yet,
and afraid I wasn't there.  I certainly hope you didn't loose
you greatest Unix contributors to NT :-)  Consider me blistfully
politically ignorant.

> that said, if you or anyone else says that 2.0 should wait 
> for "LOTS MORE
> REALLY GREAT FEATURES" then you're doing us all a disservice.
> 
> there's nothing at all wrong with 2.0 being 1.3 plus threads.

I 100% agree with you, from our perspective... We Win32 folks
love threading :-)

And I have no issue with releasing the 2.0 threaded - platform
optmizied and undeniably most-reliable product.

Yes - I'm a big Unicode advocate.  I'm also a realist.  If this
makes it when everyone else is ready - then great!  If not...

Bill

Mime
View raw message