httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: htdocs?
Date Sun, 19 Nov 2000 01:01:32 GMT
On Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 04:25:23PM -0800, wrote:
> > > I completely disagree.  Have you noticed that 99% of the changes to the
> > > docs are from non-coders.  That is very good and very bad.  It is good
> > > because the docs are getting updated and bad because it shows that the
> > > coders feel they don't need to deal with the docs.
> > 
> > And what is your point? Say it is bad all you like, but it is not going to
> > change how people work. Either the coders will do the docs, or they won't.
> > One or two repositories isn't going to change it.
> The point is that developers aren't writing docs.  I wish we could know
> how many developers were actually downloading the docs, but we can't
> really know that.

I know you're trying to make a point that developers aren't writing docs.
But it is just moot. Whether developers do or not, or whether they download
it or not, is not the issue.

The split has encouraged much more doc writing than there ever was. This is
Goodness. Mucking with the organization of htdocs is NOT going to change who
or how much contribution occurs.

If the split encouraged it, then let's not unsplit.

> > > BTW, I just did another FRESH checkout from CVS, and I'm still getting
> > > files in the htdocs directory.
> > 
> > What files? I didn't see any in my look through apache-2.0/htdocs/. If you
> > can list them, then we can fix it.
> You won't see them in apache-2.0/htdocs.  The problem is the &htdocs-2.0
> in the modules file.

Okay. If that is the problem, then why is it still in there?

> That checks out part of the htdocs directory
> automatically when you check out Apache 2.0.  The problem is that the
> files it checks out are incomplete.  You already have my .cvsrc file, now
> execute these commands with that .cvsrc:
> cvs -d co apache-2.0
> cd apache-2.0/htdocs/manual/mod
> ls mpmt_pthread.html
> You won't find that file.  But, if you check out the htdocs directory
> yourself, it's there.  If after you do a checkout, you go into the htdocs
> directory and do a cvs update, you will get a lot of errors as well.

If the &htdocs-2.0 is not doing what it should, then punt the damn thing.

You can't blame the break on the split if it is caused by problems with
interpreting the modules file!

> > You have identified three problems that I know of:
> > 
> > 1) some EmptyDir thing. we don't know if this is because of the htdocs split
> >    or some temporary inconsistency in one of the CVS repositories or pserver
> >    or whatever.
> I don't use pserver, so I doubt that is involved at all.
> Considering I was able to do a "cvs update" as soon as I removed the
> htdocs dir, and in another repository that I hadn't checked out htdocs, I
> tend to believe this is related to the htdocs split.  However I am willing
> to concede that this was most likely due to my checking the entire
> httpd-docs-2.0 repository.  I have just duplicated this problem exactly by
> doing:
> cvs -d co apache-2.0
> cd apache-2.0
> rm -Rf htdocs
> cvs -d co -d htdocs httpd-docs-2.0
> cvs update
> This gives the errors:
> Warning: Remote host denied X11 forwarding, perhaps xauth program could
> not be run on the server side.
> cvs server: failed to create lock directory in repository
> `/home/cvs/CVSROOT/Emptydir': Permission denied
> cvs server: failed to obtain dir lock in repository
> `/home/cvs/CVSROOT/Emptydir'
> cvs [server aborted]: read lock failed - giving up
> Saying that I can't checkout the full repository is a bit bogus, but I am
> willing to accept this as a limitation.

The point is to ask why the error occurs in the first place? What is the
true stimulus? Is it that httpd-docs-2.0 does not have anything besides an
"htdocs" subdirectory? (i.e. that it is empty)

We have a repro case. Cool. A quick persual of a CVS FAQ would probably turn
up the answer.

If that is the case, then we do one of two things:

1) tell people to only check out the subdir rather than the parent
2) put a file in there

Personally, I don't know why there is a subdir in the first place. If we
always skip the parent dir, then what's the point?

> > 2) checking out httpd-docs-2.0 directory doesn't work. easy resolution:
> >    check out httpd-docs-2.0/htdocs
> Checking out the whole repository does work.  However you can't check it
> out in your development tree and still update the tree.

Because of the EmptyDir thing? Okay. Let's find out why that happens?

It seems a bit silly to revise our CVS repository strategy to fix EmptyDir
before we even know the true *cause* of EmptyDir.

And your two sentences seem inconsistent. Checking out the whole repository
obviously doesn't work, if you can't update your tree.

> > 3) files still exist somewhere in apache-2.0/htdocs. name them, and we'll
> >    get them deleted properly.
> They have been delete from Apache, however the modules file has us
> checking them out anyway.  We tried removing this once, and that was
> veto'ed, because people said that developers need to actually download the
> docs.  I happen to agree that forcing developers to download the docs is
> 100% correct.  However, currently we force developers to download partial
> docs only, which is completely bogus.

If the feature doesn't work, and it gets in the way of developers who *do*
want to download docs... then it should be axed.

If a developer doesn't want to bother with the docs, then they won't.
Playing gimmicks in the modules file is just that: gimmicks. It isn't going
to change the developers' behavior. And hell -- it is causing problems for
the developers who *do* have the "desired" behavior.

The answer is to fix the modules file. Not to muck with the split.

I'd say that the people to veto removing that line were effectively saying
"please don't fix things. I want my htdocs to continue breaking."

> > Each of these has a specific resolution. None are permanent problems due to
> > the split.
> I have just given you a VERY specific analysis of the problem.  This is
> completely reproducable and it is exactly what people have been
> complaining about ever since the split was made.

Your explanation was the first to provide this kind of detail. I've heard
some grumbling, but nobody was ever substantive or tried to explain what the
real problem was.

> If you know how to fix
> these issues, then please do so.

Sounds like we remove that joke of a line in the modules directory.

> If you don't know how to fix them, then
> please remove your veto so that Roy can fix them by moving the htdocs
> back into the source tree.
> BTW, the way I read what Roy was going to do, it didn't keep people from
> contributing to just the docs, it just solved the problem in a different
> way.

It sounded like he was going to 'mv' the repository down inside of the
apache-2.0 repository. That will break a lot of things. If he does a "cvs
add" to copy all the files over, that would work for a bit.

But what do we do about permissions then? Right now, both repositories are
group-owned by "apcvs" and we use the "avail" file to apply ACLs. If we
shove the htdocs down into apache-2.0, then what does the avail file look
like then?

I found Roy's note to be rather less-than-detailed about the "solution". And
it certainly didn't explain the problem that *he* had with the system. I
understand the issue that you're seeing, but it sounds like it is two

1) the EmptyDir thing (we need to find out "why")
2) the modules file (delete the dumb line)


Greg Stein,

View raw message