Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Ryan Bloom <rbb@covalent.net>
Reply-To: rbb@covalent.net
Organization: Covalent Technologies
To: dev@httpd.apache.org, Jeff Trawick <trawick@attglobal.net>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:09:05 -0700
References: <200109071232.IAA24926@devsys.jaguNET.com>
 <20010910134602.34E7646DF4@koj.rkbloom.net>
 <m37kv7yv3f.fsf@rdu88-250-106.nc.rr.com>
In-Reply-To: <m37kv7yv3f.fsf@rdu88-250-106.nc.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <20010910150905.A4E1546DF4@koj.rkbloom.net>

On Monday 10 September 2001 07:32, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Maybe I shouldn't care, but I don't like these depictions :(
>
> Ryan Bloom <rbb@covalent.net> writes:
> > On Monday 10 September 2001 03:59, Greg Stein wrote:
> > > 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.
>
> Who do you think was just going to commit the code with your veto in
> place?  "Everybody" is definitely inaccurate.  Without naming names it
> becomes hard to ascertain out the truth.

I will not name names on a public list (Why do I feel like I am sitting in front
of a senate committee?)  Suffice to say, I believe that this code will end up
being committed with or without the veto in place.

>
> >                                  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.
>
> Maybe some folks want to spite RC.  I dunno.
>
> Another theory (I know this one to be true for at least one person :)
> ) is that some folks were in favor of a GZ module and there was only
> one to look at properly and choose from, and it seemed reasonably
> coded and could be easily shown to work with the current code.

We've been over this too much for me to explain again why the module
doesn't belong in the core.  If you want a GZ module, then create a
repository for external projects.  Create an external project, put it on
source-forge, host it yourself.  This doesn't need to be in the core.

Ryan

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