httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gonyou, Austin" <aus...@coremetrics.com>
Subject RE: Apache 2.0 final ?
Date Wed, 13 Jun 2001 15:59:33 GMT
Where the heck is 2.0.18 for download? CVS?

-- 
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-796-9023
email: austin@coremetrics.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Holsman [mailto:IanH@cnet.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 10:32 AM
> To: 'new-httpd@apache.org'
> Subject: RE: Apache 2.0 final ?
> 
> 
> Hi Daniel,
> we are already devleoping custom modules for 2.0,
> ok.. sometimes we get a bit burnt and have to go and change
> some function names when something gets pulled into the APR,
> 
> but in my experience the change is to a function name, the concept
> stays the same, and is a low-risk change.
> 
> I sugest you grab the 2.0.19 release (when it gets pushed to BETA)
> and use that as a baseline, subscribe to the CVS mailing list and
> take a note when you see comments like 'changed function 
> name' or 'moved to APR'
> 
> ..Ian
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Padwa, Daniel [mailto:daniel.padwa@gs.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 6:42 AM
> > To: 'new-httpd@apache.org'
> > Subject: RE: Apache 2.0 final ?
> > 
> > 
> > > I think people like him are asking: when is the fiddling 
> > done, and people
> > > have a program they can start to incorporate into their 
> > operating system
> > > releases, deploy for production customers, etc?  While 
> > we're still working
> > > on low-level issues like pools/sms in APR and fixing other 
> > big performance
> > > issues, we're not there yet.
> > 
> > Another spin on the same question: when do the core 
> > developers (you know who
> > you are) think that the internal APIs have stabilized enough 
> > so that effort
> > expended porting home-grown modules won't need to be thrown 
> > away when 2.0
> > settles down?
> > 
> > Some of us (I don't have enough data to say "many") can't put 
> > the server
> > through heavy burn-in without local modules, and can't 
> > justify porting those
> > to a not-settled set of core APIs.
> > 
> > Or did I miss the announcement that we had passed this point? 
> >   It doesn't
> > need to be an unbreakable promise, just some guidance.
> > 
> 

Mime
View raw message