Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 30572 invoked by uid 500); 19 Apr 2001 22:08:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 30560 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2001 22:08:21 -0000 Errors-To: Message-ID: <004101c0c91d$0ccc15f0$95c0b0d0@roweclan.net> Reply-To: "William A. Rowe, Jr." From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." To: References: <200104192055.QAA05011@indefatigable.cnchost.com> Subject: Re: mod_proxy in HTTPd Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:06:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N From: "Chuck Murcko" Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 3:55 PM > Totally agree. That's why we as mod_proxy commit to cutting a release of > the web server too. Then users have what they want, in one package. Or a > generic "apache rollup" build with the non-core modules put in. > Mod_rewrite too? In a rollup??? Absolutely! The tricky bit will be identifing the last 'stable' release of the apache child projects, overtagging that tag with the apache release version, and letting it fly. I just don't see a simple mechanism (for the RM) to do this all in a free hour :-( No experimenting on unwilling participants. Just because the user wants to be a bit bleeding-edge in core, proxy, rewrite, or whatnot, doesn't mean they wish to bleed to death :-) Bill