httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Peter J. Cranstone" <cranst...@ehyperspace.com>
Subject RE: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
Date Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:58:14 GMT
>> All I keep thinking, is that we are trying to spite RC by adding a
different GZ module

Don't worry about it. Let's see if we can make a decision on what is
good for the survival of Apache irrespective of what that means for RC.


Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Bloom [mailto:rbb@covalent.net] 
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 7:46 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org; Greg Stein
Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS


On Monday 10 September 2001 03:59, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 10:38:45PM -0700, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >...
> > Ryan's veto has effectively tabled this for now.  I'm begining to 
> >respect  this from the perspective of putting a release in peoples 
> >hands.  It can  be introduced soon afterwards, or if someone likes, a

> >subproject can be  created.  This has been too long people, let's put

> >2.0 to bed.
>
> Some people believe his veto is illegitimate -- that there is no 
> technical reason for vetoing the inclusion into modules/experimental.

I have removed my veto.  Although, I would point out that illegitimate
veto or not, nobody in this group has ever gotten away with going
through a veto. The only reason I have removed my veto is that it really
looks like everybody was about to ignore it anyway.  This whole thing
just leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.  All I keep thinking, is
that we are trying to spite RC by adding a different GZ module.

Ryan ______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom				rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies			rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------

Mime
View raw message