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: cvs commit: apache-1.3/src/os/win32 service.c service.h
Date Mon, 05 Jun 2000 18:39:29 GMT
> From: wrowe@locus.apache.org [mailto:wrowe@locus.apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 1:05 PM
> 
>   Index: STATUS
>   ===================================================================
>   +    * Assure the windows.html reflects reality, today.
>   +        - running the service as a user other than SYSTEM (NT/2000).
>   +        - CONDITIONALLY - if someone posts revisions to the list for
>   +          htdocs/manual/windows.html to properly document JJK's Win95
>   +          services support as a -HIGHLY EXPERIMENTAL- patch,
>   +          OtherBill will include that patch (with -k runservice rather
>   +          than -s, not documented in the -h list of options, and with
>   +          FreeConsole() -following- successful parsing of httpd.conf).
>   +          Too many are complaining, -but- 3+ Win95 users must step up
>   +          to test this new patch offered late Mon eve before we proceed.

Ok, explanation...

I've had several sideband comments about this side of JJK's patch.  It took
considerable rework to get it to integrate well into 2.0, but I did start
in my devel 1.3.x tree.  So it is already there.

If those who want this patch applied will speak up to the list, and one will
offer a patch to the windows.html docs to bring that up to this patch,
and several will commit to testing the revised patch, I'll go for it.

HOWEVER, it must be clearly marked -HIGHLY EXPERIMENTAL- (for this rev).
If it works well, and we don't see the complaints, then we will remove
that caviat for 2.0 :-)  We must warn them that if it works -at all- we
can not attest to it's reliability or future support of that feature.

My original thought - "This is a new feature"... didn't hold water.  If we
are going to deploy in 2.0, why not get it tested in 1.3.13?  That affords
us the best confidence in a clean 2.0 release.  Also, several complained
that they were needing that feature now, not in several months or whenever
2.0 gets rolling into beta.  [beta 2.0 should be stronger than Win32 1.3!]



Mime
View raw message