httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] mod_proxy in?
Date Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:57:27 GMT
Chuck Murcko wrote:
> Given the points of view perhaps it's better to ask which of these 
> alternatives seems closest to consensus:
> c) Treating mod_proxy maintenance as NOT tied to httpd, mod_proxy 
> development as running on its own release cycle, mod_proxy code has its 
> own cvs module (hey, we can start module-2.1 now, right), and is 
> released with httpd distribution. Note that this may require some 
> reintegration at each httpd release (and more work than b).
> d) Treating mod_proxy as a separate project like mod_perl, on its own 
> maintenance and development cycle, own repository, own release dates, 
> and is not released with httpd, but runs under

My own personal pref is for either c or d. If I had to choose between
those 2, then I'd choose d

I think folding it back into httpd development will cause it to
"flounder" again.
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   [|]
          "Hell is hot, that's never been disputed by anybody."

View raw message