Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 17:10:04 -0700
From: Aaron Bannert <aaron@clove.org>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: Q1: Rollup Release Format
Message-ID: <20010918171004.Q11014@clove.org>
References: <3BA7D337.FB0A0CDC@sharp.fm>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <3BA7D337.FB0A0CDC@sharp.fm>;
 from minfrin@sharp.fm on Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 01:05:27AM +0200

On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 01:05:27AM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
> o Option B: apache-2.x.x.tar.gz, apache-modules-2.x.x.tar.gz
> 
>   Combine httpd-2.0, apr, apr-util into apache-2.x.x.tar.gz,
>   and combine httpd-proxy, httpd-ldap into apache-modules-2.x.x.tar.gz.
> 
> o Option C: apache-2.x.x.tar.gz, apache-proxy-2.x.x.tar.gz,
>   apache-ldap-2.x.x.tar.gz
> 
>   Combine httpd-2.0, apr, apr-util into apache-2.x.x.tar.gz, 
>   and combine httpd-proxy into apache-proxy-2.x.x.tar.gz, and
>   combine httpd-ldap into apache-ldap-2.x.x.tar.gz.

All three choices are fine, but I'm leaning toward B and C
for these reasons:

- IMHO, most people get apache in a pre-built binary form, so it matters
   not to them how it is source distributed.

- It is also my opinion that those who seek the source distribution would
   prefer flexibility in the build system over the minor inconvenience
   of having to download a couple extra files (that are nonessential to
   barebones ./configure-with-no-options web serving).

- We should use the proxy and ldap modules to promote community usage
   of http://modules.apache.org/ (*)


(* I think this is an important one)

-aaron